HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA94-17 Frees Variance
/VIii I L 57/1 PF ~ff~&/
APPLICATION FOR VARIAOCE
VA. 9+ -/7
PID.~25-268-o03-O
Applicant: David A. & Marianne Frees Bame Phone: 612-665-6568
Address: Route 3, Woodhill Acres, LeSueur, MN ~bU~~ WOrk Phone: blL-~~U=OOUb
Property Owner: Margaret A. Conroy Bame Phone: 612-445-2644
Address: 6320 Conroy St. N.E.. Prior Lake. MN 55372 WOrk Phone:
Type of Ownership: Fee Contract Purchase Aareement x
Consultant/Contractor: D. A. Frees. P .E.. A. LA. Phone: 61~-330=88u()
SuBUFCr $IT~ ADOR-eS5 P\J(p34& CfJN~{j or. Nff.
Existing Use (1- D . C' D
of Property: Vacant Present Zoning: n / l>
Legal Description
of Variance Site: N 1/2 Sec. 30 T. 115 R. 21, Tra~t C, R.L.S. 147
Variance Reauested: Construction within 75 foot setba~k trom_~U4 ~Levat1on. _
Carry 90'9.3 fi1.l e.levat:1on lU reel: \.versus J.J Lt:t:L) aWay l.J.UlII J.uuuJclL..luu wa......l
on the west side of property. (Reference additional documents.)
Has the applicant previously sought to plat, rezone, obtain a variance or conditional
use pemit on the subject site or any part of it? Yes x N>
What was requested:
When:
Disposition:
\.
Describe the type of inprovements proposed:
~.u:SSION ~.lREMENl'S:
(A)Canpleted application fom. (B)Filing fee. (C)Property SUrvey indicating the
proposed developnent in relation to property lines and/or ordinary-higl'ewater mark~
proposed building elevations and drainage plan. (D) Certified from abstract fim,
names and addresses of property owners within 100 feet of the exterior boundaries of
the subject property. (E)Canplete legal description & Property Identification Number
(PID). (F)Deed restrictions or private covenants, if applicable. (G)A parcel map
at 1 "-20 '-50' shCMing: The site developnent plan, buildings: parking, loading,
access, surface drainage, landscaping and utility service.
ONLY COMPLETE APPLICATIONS SIALL BE AC\..J:.1'.L'w AND REVIEWED BY 'U1~ PLANNIID mtMISSION.
To the best of my knowledge the infoonation presented on this form is correct. In
addition, I have read Section 7.6 of the PWior~zon' Ordinance which specifies
requiranents for variance procedures. I agr t av' information and follCM the
procedures as outl ined in the Ordinance. '"'YJ1/J ~ ~.. -.. .... .. o-r
? ~ , '/ 1?~,r"7/ //..cv~-d'~
.' I
/ Appli s Signature
SUbnitted this / day of / /V~ 19q4- Y) //1. .
, ./~~et:n_~{2zV
FeE{ CNn Signature /-
THIS SPACE IS '10 BE FILLED our BY .J.n~ PLANNIID DIROCTOR .,-",
PLANNING m1MISSION / APPROVED DENIED (p - J 10 - q if DM'E OF HFARIID
w:J:f c:otN:IL APPEAL A.t-.t'lV'lID DENIED mTE OF HFARIID
CONDITIONS: ~prDv'ed a Lf51 lak~ ~lOre- varia-nee- fYOn1 -rht- 7~' f tAJ<esh DY'"V
~Q cA<. rtt{p" Y'/m/,t1,1-.
b)'!'fJ '(R;(rl1UJ_JA5SOrlo.iJ..; 111liW/V
Signature 0 the ianning Director Date
b/2() /qLf
I I
VARIANCE CHECK LIST
II VARFM II
SUBJECT SITE:
&3410 Collr 0&/ 6tr~t Nt
1YLl/id d- !v10uJJia/l/l& F-r~
APPLICANT:
SCHEDULE HEARING DATE:
DNR NOTICE IF SHORELAND:
PREPARE AREA MAP:
APPLICANT NOTICE:
PROPERTY OWNERS NOTICE:
NOTICE TO DOUG - ENGINEERING
NOTIFY OTHERS:
Scott County
Watershed District
COMMISSION ~ENDA PACKETS:
V /' Staff Memo
V ~Application Form
V Copy of Public Notice
CH~
~ -3-ql./" @ b/Jft;/9f
@/O!OO
~
V
t/
V,
V
lo-"~
(1/- ::?
t-~
~
/7-3
MNDOT
Other
~ Applicable Maps
~~Copy of Parcel Info.
~/ Other Applicable Info.
STAFF ACTIVITIES
MAIL COPY OF APPLICATION AND
REQUIRED CONDITIONS TO APPLICANT:
MAIL COPY OF APPLICATION AND
CONDITIONS TO DNR:
GIVE COPY OF APPLICAITON AND
CONDITIONS TO BLD. INSPECTOR
ASSIGN FILE NUMBER:
AMEND VARIANCE SUMMARY SHEET:
ADD PERMIT TO PROPERTY MGMT:
V
/
/
f.t2 / ;2 ()
,
(0 !:JO
fo/J-o
//
~
~J20/q4
6;cW/9t/-
, ,
File #: VA 91..f-/7 Applicant: _DttllirJ_f Mltfid./Ift..L.ftu.s
Legal: Tra~f C;.R.L.vif7Address: (nr'1'-1fv. (j)l7r-J {C,-J-. N~
FILE SHOULD CONTAIN:
FILE BY:
Staff Memo
Original Application
Copy of Notice to OWners
Planning Corom. Minutes
Other Information
Applicable Maps and Documents
Copy of Public Notice
Correspondence
Council Minutes if Applicable
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA 11~M:
SUBJECT:
PRESEl'll ~R:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
5
CONSIDER VARIANCE REQUEST FOR DAVID FREES
GINA MITCHELL, ASSOCIATE CITY PLANNER
_YESXNO
JUNE 16, 1994
Il'l1.KODULTI0N:
The Planning Department has received a variance application from David Frees of Route 3,
Woodhill Acres, LeSueur, Minnesota. The applicant is requesting the Planning Commission to
approve a 68' lake shore variance from the 75' lakeshore setback requirement to construct a
single family home located at 6346 Conroy Street NE, as indicated on the attached survey.
PHYSIOGRAPHY:
The subject site is approximately 120' wide and 140' deep, containing approximately 15,114
square feet of lot area. The site slopes from the road to the lakeshore, with about 11' of relief.
The site is centered on a depression, the result is that the ordinary high water mark of Prior Lake
encroaches further north on this lot than the adjacent lot to the west (see attached survey). There
are four oak trees on the site ranging from 8 - 28 caliper inches.
The Flood Plain Ordinance requires that the lowest living elevation of a home be at 909.3, with
fill 15' beyond the foundation at an elevation of 908.3. To comply with this ordinance, the
applicant is proposing to have a tie wall adjacent to the 904 with a top elevation of 909.3.
According to Verlyn Raaen of the Engineering Department, to accomplish this, approximately
488 cubic yards of filling will be required (see attached survey for area that requires fill).
ADJACENT USES:
This subject site was part of Conroy's Bay which was originally platted in 1926 within the City
of Savage. In 1974 the City of Prior Lake annexed this area. In 1992 the City of Prior Lake
approved a Registered Land Survey which replatted lots 23 and 24, and the outlot to the west
into three tracts of land (see attached Maps 2 and 3).
This area is almost completely developed with single family homes and many cabins which have
been upgraded/remodeled. Several of the properties to the east have received front yard (ranging
from 5' - 15') and lakeshore (ranging from 45.7' - 53') variances. Most of these lots are
substandard lots which have been combined to result in lot sizes ranging from 6,700 - 9,900
square feet. These lots are also quite shallow, with depths of approximately 100', compared to
the applicant's lot which is over 15,000 square feet and is over 140' deep.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
The applicant's lot exceeds the minimum requirements of the Shoreland District Regulations of
the Zoning Ordinance for lot size and width measured at the front setback line. The minimum
l
4629 Dakota 51. 5.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
lot size is 15,000, and the applicant's site is 15,114 square feet. The minimum lot width
(measured at the 25' setback) is 90', the applicant's site is 120' wide. In addition to the setback
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, the applicant must meet a 20' east side yard setback
according to Court File 88-12539. Once all setbacks are applied, the resulting building envelope
is 44' x 87' , requiring no variances.
The applicant has positioned his home 7' from the ordinary high water mark of Prior Lake to try
to preserve a 28" and an 8" caliper oak tree. The root zone of the 28" oak, as indicated on the
survey, will be cut due to the construction of the garage and home. The root zone will also be
disturbed from the fill that will need to be placed over it in order to meet the requirements of the
Flood Plain Ordinance. This proposed home location will require that an 8" and a 12" oak be
removed.
While this 28" oak is a significant tree, the preservation does not, in staffs opinion, justify a 68'
lake shore variance. The applicant has a sufficient building envelope to build a home without
variance to the Zoning Ordinance, while still preserving two significant oak trees. Unfortunately,
the targeted tree is located within the building envelope. The Planning Commission will need to
determine if the two oak trees (8" and 28") provide sufficient hardship to allow construction of a
new single family home, 7' from the 904 contour. It is the opinion of staff that although it is the
intent of the applicant to strategically place the home in a location that would least disturb the
28" oak's root zone, it may still be destroyed as result of the cutting and filling that will be
necessary to construct the home as proposed. Staff also feels that the variance requested is too
extreme and that the applicant should consider alternatives which will likely require removal of
the largest oak tree.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the variances as requested, or with some modifications as per Planning
Commission discussion.
2. Continue or table discussion for specific reasons.
3. Deny the variances finding lack of demonstrated hardship.
RECOMMENDATION:
The recommendation from staff is Alternative #3. Staff recommends that the applicant explore
other options for locating his home within the building envelope. This would allow the applicant
to save two of the oaks on the site, while reducing or possibly eliminating the amount of filling
which would be required to comply with the Flood Plain Ordinance.
Variance Hardship Standards:
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship with respect
to the property.
The applicant has a lot that exceeds the minimum requirements for lake shore lots in size
and width. This results in a 44' x 87' building envelope which would allow the applicant
to reasonably use his property by building a home that complies with the Zoning
Ordinance.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique to the property.
The ordinary high water mark of Prior Lake encroaches further north on this property
than the property to the west. The applicant does however have an adequate building
envelope that could support a home requiring no variance.
3. The hardship is caused by provisions of the Ordinance and is not the result of
actions of persons presently having an interest in the property.
This lot was replatted in 1992. At the time of the replat, staff reviewed the division to
confirm that a home could be built on the lot without being at variance. There are other
options that the applicant could explore that would not require a variance to build a home.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces substantial
justice and is not contrary to the public interest.
The lake shore variance requested is inconsistent with what has been approved for smaller
lots within the study area. Approving this variance as requested would set a negative
precedent and would not be in the best interest of the community. The largest lakeshore
variance that was granted by the Planning Commission to construct a single family home
is 66'. This variance was granted to a lot on Breezy Point Road, located on the tip of the
peninsula. This substandard lot of record has an area of approximately 9,000 square feet.
When all setbacks are applied to this lot there is no area for a building pad. The 66'
lakeshore variance request was reasonable in this situation because the 904 contour
encroached the lot on three sides.
Motion died for lack of a second
MOTION BY ROSElli, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO APPROVE A FIVE (5) SOUlH SIDE YARD
VARIANCE FROM THE TEN (10) SIDE YARD VARIANCE FOR 14588 GLENDALE AVENUE AND
DENY 1HE THREE (3) FOOT NORTH SIDE YARD VARIANCE FROM THE TEN (10) FOOT
REQUIREMENT. RATIONAlE FOR DENYING THE NORTH SIDE YARD VARIANCE IS TIfAT A
PREccuENTWOULD BE SET IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
Discussion followed. on precedent set, variances granted in the past and variance reference infonnation was
given. The applicant stated he would give a 3 foot deed resniction to lot 6 (the vacant lot to the nOlth which
he owns) if a 2 foot north side yard variance were granted to the subject site.
Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Vonhof, Kuykendall and Amold. Nay by Loftus. Commissioner
Loftus stated that precedent has not been set MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM V - DAVID FREES . VARIANCE
David Frees, Route 3, LeSuem, stated he is requesting a 68 foot variance in order to consnuct a single
family home located at 6346 CVlllUY SU"eet NE. Due to the topography of the lot, he wishes to position the
house to take advantage of the view and is nying to save large n"ees on the site.
Gina Mitchell, Associate Planner, presented the infOlmation as per planning repOlt of June 16, 1994. The
request is for a 68 foot Valiance from the 75 foot lakeshore setback requirement The subject site is
aw~vximately 15,114 square feet The site is centered on a depression, the result is that the ordinalY high
water mark of Prior Lake encroaches further n01th on this lot There are 4 oak n"ees on the site ranging from
8 - 28 caliper inches. Staff recommends the applicant explore other options for locating his home which
may result in losing the largest oak n"ee but saving 2 others. Staff is of the opinion that the Valiance
requested is too eXU"eme, and recommends denial.
Joan WaLmd, realtor representing the propelty, stated because of the slope of the land the house has to be
angled and the design of the house is unique.
M1: Frees felt the largest oak tree can be saved and would take precautions in excavating, drainage and
grading.
A letter from DNR w&,> read into the record opposing the 68 foot lakeshore Valiance.
Comments from the Commissioners were: propelty is unique, roots may be cut on large n"ee dUling
constt'l.lction regardless of where house is located, blockage of view by future house to the west, the long
flat slope of the lot pushes the legal building envelope close to the road flood elevations and filling below
904, and analysis of altemative building OPPOltunities.
ManON BY LOFfUS, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO DENY THE 68 FOOT LAKESHORE FROM THE
75 FOOT LAKESHORE SeltlACK REQUIREMENT. RATIONAlE BEING THE LOT IS NOT A
SUBSTANDARD LOT, REQUEST GOES BEYOND PRECEDENT, AND 01HER OPTIONS CAN BE
CONSIDERED.
Discussions followed at which time the applicant showed an altemate plan that would require a 45 foot
vanance.
The motion was withdrawn.
MarrON BY VONHOF, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO APPROVE A 45 FOOT LAKESHORE SelbACK
REQUIREMENT FROM THE 75 FOOT LAKESHORE Shl.tSACK REQUIREMENf. RATIONALE
PI..'.NNlNG COMMISSION
June 16, 1994
page 7
BEING 1HE UNIQUE CHARAClbK OF THE Lor, AND THE MEANDERING OF THE 904
CONIDURLINE CAUSES A HARDSHIP.
Vote taken signified ayes by Vonhof, Loftus, Arnold, Kuykendall and Roseth. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION BY ROSElli, SECOND BY KUYKENDALL, TO ADJOURN THE M.tbl1NG.
Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Kuykendall, Vonhof, Amold and Loftus. MOTION CARRIED.
TIle meeting adjolUned at 12:40 A.M. Tapes of meeting on file at City Hall.
Horst W. Graser
Director of Planning
Rita M. Schewe
Recording Secretary
PL.'U'JNING COMMISSION
June 16, 1994
Page 8
~ - -1282.55
WWI
"..,
61"11
EUSnCE'
I
TLOr- A
(' ..( !.
3
~
.
2
AnO'N
348.48
".
.
I
\
KEN JOHNSON
IIIU~85
I
I ~.. .....
------ -
----
--...
COUNTY
~ ,\
ROA D 4- 2- /..
I
.,
"2.
\,.01
/~ ~ :
r~ /
J !~~
~7 Ill\-' ~
~ "
i ~ 6
~ -
. - .
.c. ,
t> -
...
IY- l'"
-r;
J- tI 1 .
~. 9 ';
~ ~.' II'
!: ,rlo " 12
....\. ~
(~:t -
~ I~
1 -~
15
2
.....
.
.WETTERLlN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
;181752
.&0
O.
t'N
o
If)
.~
1;1
_.
-
FREES VAfllANCE
SUBJECT SITE
MAP #1
~
~~:' j~'f}~:":' .("::',r .
!C,~f!I ' I ' ~,,~:.,.
il~~;' .
},y ,.: .t' .'
.~, .
:1':f'" l.~' "
p~, 1f~ Ii
~j~ l"
i~! ~
-~ 1 'f
: t i i
~fl ·
If'' 1
t: ~ 1
~ f lrf
J~ ~ ! : ~
'\~ if
~! ;1
.,
I
~"
!~,;'l
:!':
li' It,'
..//., .'
,t
L
'," ~"I " ,u;'.' A, .
..... '.,1... '. .....~"'....... ..~~..1.......1...,...!'..... ..... .' '.>."
, .'~' ~~!'.,t. 'l".~' ...i.:,~:..~t '/, ."..\.
~ . .-t ,'1." .'
'.t13'Jl.'~' ..i. . .'l.>...... . . .l-
. _'( ..' ..~. ~~ ',:-i.. ... ~
.. 'If", ..~i. ... . ... j
, .:..,.~... ": ~ J
i ,t~~ ~ ~':.: 'Ii!..:....,;:' . ~ ' . I
.. '-ill'. ..~ {" ~. ;~'.'..':~.'..'~...'.:.;....1.1 ,.-:..... i .'~
. .... '>wI ' ,~"" ,. ."1~.. ~'
.. lit .', I' ' , , :-
. ~ ..~ .'. '
.,11' 1 . ..~. :".'.: f';'~;jll'.. .. ~ . '--.. t' ~ I'
... ..4 .1... __I
'\...."'1" -~"'" . . 'lS.i
i H~~'~ ... If ,~, :J '1
o '" Il~'U . ~... ,i' t.
F t. r,..t- . 'J. "> ~,~
~ rm~ . .i I! ~i .i
~ 'J' .., " ... 1 t: I r
\f~"l~' ~ &:'~
tJ~ i~f~ jl I!
~lJ'~ ~~.\ i-) J1'.
~~'\.~t fttM,. i l~
~ ~ ",.t!~ .... ~ll
~l~hli ~ u'
~~Hnr.l. h,.!t ~l
~1.:-iJ"'.~'I~1 a" ~~
.It,' 1H!t f- <e
__ t~ __" ~
I"f ~olI · j '" i 5
""'*'~ ~ ~~ t ~
, .
."
~~
)Ii
,)~
~.
\0;) , , .
., ~ . '" ...... '.~'
II .. ..,'~ :........'~d. i:.j~~~. ..:'. '.::'
. .L..,-=-NIo. ...' ; ,,#
'4"":~~:... '....., .<. I'i ,,~ -~-. '- - ,J..
/j,l,j;, ~. 'lJ~,; ......, ~ ~-:~'!f',"~,r~;" .~ ,,' .: ' :.~,~,
,.
t I
~ J
t
I '11
-/: : '\\
~.t~J
~ ~ 1
~'1s I
~ I
r:j
~1l
o'lsl
Q;' l .
~~ !
~l
'>-~
It
~-~
~ "
-~
I
~
.
">=
~
~
o
r:r
~
~
.
~ . !;~'~ J
~ 'i 'i .
~' "~ ~ (
:.:' i-..i
. i .' t,
.':-;~ "
-., ,+.
:tI ,J i I . ;
IE li - f
:5
(r :. 'fl
~ ; n
~ ,1'
~
.
Q: "
~ ~\ '
.f:
0 '" \ ..
::;) ,.:
Q: ,,<.;\
"
I.
l(. , ·
(i
-~
.
N
~
Q.
c(
.~
.\.
.~ ." ~
,,~J
j
I
,0)
~. L '"
.Il
~
i
"'1
\
\
\
\?
~
'74
"',,:.
~.
-
\ .0
~\
\//
o
I
SCAU'
REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. ill
SCUI I COUNTY. MINNESOTA
.lIO
,
..'
'.'(
-..
ll.
u:
l.U
u.
MAP #3
-----
~~
'1- ~
"-'1"'1',-, N'I,
... ~ 14'.., ....-
'"I,' - Or..
, ~O~.,...
-. ,~~~o;:;-:":" ~
-...... .., ~
...., JIo . .
". ,o~9 ~
):~,~
, ....::r """"
S87"14'''''r
. - ........a- __
C'.
~
'..
Il:
},
;1
, 3:
~~
0'
zj
1
/.~
rP/'
.p'
11'" ... " ,., zs .24. CllNAOI"S ..~
~~:'.:: E 2 .L
tU.....- .. '-r.~
--:J ' .
:. - .. , '~
... !,... /1, I 8.
\ ~~2t \\ ~"' \ .~.
: ' ~~.,.... I t.\'
B (..1. · I ~...... /~
I ~~' !.'./ ." .-. I 2.
'" ,';V S t;
-~" C .
&"Or,. ,I ..
!; /\ -.
"\ ,-\ / ' ~
~ .!.~ I
./.. ~ i ~.t> -----~' i..,..,,""'~'
~"JV' .. ,==--- " q:~ ''''\ ....1 I
/. ..,~' ': 1:;,... r-. l."
_.._-... /..0 ~ ~ ''''',:..; '-d '-rOo .
r..... ..,- r- J I' ~..
7--oa~- 7 _':.~__vv_':~ I "-,. ,
/ .. . ".00__
;a:a....-.. i -
~'=W~I
\
,e
_J
.....J'
,"" \
'-'
,o'
,-' \
I . ,_I
'.
~', \,
, "
,
c"<
, ,
I
-T"
..-, I I I
\..1 '..... I
,.., :
L... ,....
A
... \
. ..
to..
.~: \
.~ ..
"'.
,
\
l'
'..
~
. ,
..."",
~.
~....-:.
l. ....
~ -"..\
\ 'So
~\
LAJ< E
PRIOR
El.. 900.'
. '" ",
50
100
I
nET
8.N" a. 906. ~ Top IXIt at hydrant at
6364 Conroy Street N. E.
IN
::"N:.=,: ':':..~:.l~'a7~3tJ15~tr'(-
. OC1<<1TCs llION MO_<<HT 1'OAJND.
o DCNanS V 2 WCH J( ,... INCH '/tON
_NT sn' . _ED 8Y
I.ICEHSE NO, 10183
Va/~~tl.il!~~/n:g .CO. P. A .
"'f!llo
_, I "'P-"'~
&3q0 Conrp'y5tr~r
Traut- c./ 1<1.-. S. 1Lf-7
"
/
../
/~//
----.-
),
/'
,.
..l
i
}-'
..
~
l
,1/
LOt Arclt:> I~ Illf 5f!)' Ft
ImpervIous SuriQLe- Cove-r~f/ ::: lq%
I":::. 20'
.VA17PN"
NOTICE OF HEARING
FOR VARIANCE APPLICATION
You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake Planning Commission will hold a hearing in the City Council
Chambers located at City Hall, 4629 Dakota Street S.E. on:
.Date:
THURSDAY. JUNE 16. 1994
Time:
10:00 P.M.
APPLICANT:
David and Marianne Frees
Route 3, Woodhill Acres
LeSueur, Minnesota 56058
SUBJECT SITE:
6346 Conroy Street NE
Tract C. Registered Land Survey 147
Scott County, Minnesota
REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to construct a single family home as indicated on
the attached survey. In order to construct the home as proposed, the
applicant requests that the Planning Commission grant the following
variance from the requirements of Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance 86-3:
A 68' lakeshore variance from the 75' lakeshore setback requirement.
If you are interested in this issue, you should attend the hearing. The Planning Commission will accept
oral and/or written comments. Questions related to this hearing should be directed to the Prior Lake
Planning Department by calling 447-4230 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through
Friday.
Prior Lake Planning Commission
Date Mailed: June 3, 1994
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
PHONE NO.
~ STATE OF
~~~~@Lr~
DEPARTMENT
Metro Waters, 1200
772-7910
OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Warner Road, st. Paul, MN 55106
FILE NO.
December 8, 1994
Mr. David Frees
Route 3
Woodhill Acres
Le Sueur, MN 56058
Re: TRACT C, R.L.S. 147, 6320 CODOY STRBBT B.B., PRIOR LAKB,
SCOTT CO...~. Y
Dear Mr. Frees:
This letter serves to follow up our October 31, 1994 meeting with
City of Prior Lake staff at the subject property. You may recall
we met to discuss the illegal sand blanket and incorrect location
of the stakes delineating the 904' contour.
The sand blanket exceeds the dimensions that are allowable without
a permit. This needs to be corrected when the grading is done.
Please refer to the enclosed brochure for the allowable dimensions.
It is the same brochure I provided you when we first met on June
10, 1994.
The 904' elevation appears incorrectly staked. My survey indicates
the ground elevation at the stakes identified as 904' is actually
closer to 903'. Fill below 904' for development purposes or to
increase the setback line is prohibited by law. If the house
setback, based on the correct 904' contour, is less than the 30'
approved by the city, I will insist that the City of Prior Lake
require you to reapply for a new variance.
I have discussed the matter with staff from the city of Prior Lake.
When the footing inspection is done for your house, they will at
that time measure from the 904' line 30' to see if this setback is
met. If it is not, you will have to move the footings back to meet
this or obtain another variance from the city. Be advised, any
deck constructed must also meet the setback approved by the city.
As was agreed upon, the 904' elevation will run as a straight
across your lot according to the dimensions on R.L.S. 147.
east 904' point will be measured 90' along the east property
in a southwest direction from the east lot line angle point.
west 904' point will be measured 65' along the west property
in a southwest direction from the west lot line angle point.
line
The
line
The
line
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Mr. David Frees
December 8, 1994
Page 2
Before a certificate of Occupancy can be issued, the fill below the
904' contour must be removed and the sand blanket will also need to
be relocated as previously discussed.
Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions.
SiOerelY,
pat~ J .01)11!f;;
Area HYdr~l~~ist
PJL/MM/cds
Enclosure
c: ~a
Lani
Mitchell, City of Prior Lake Planning
Lichty, City of Prior Lake Engineering
3. The hardship is caused by 1'&" I :Sions of the Ordinance and is not the result of
actions of persons presently having an interest in the property.
This lot was replatted in 1992. At the time of the replat. staff reviewed the division to
confIrm that a home could be built on the lot without being at variance. There are other
options that the applicant could explore that would not require a variance to build a home.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces substantial
justice and is not contrary to the public interest.
The lakeshore variance requested is inconsistent with what has been approved for smaller
lots within the study area. Approving this variance as requested would set a negative
precedent and would not be in the best interest of the community. The largest lakeshore
variance that was granted by the Planning Commission to construct a single family home
is 66'. This variance was granted to a lot on Breezy Point Road. located on the tip of the
peninsula. This substandard lot of record has an area of approximately 9,000 square feet.
When all setbacks are applied to this lot there is no area for a building pad. The 66'
lakeshore variance request was reasonable in this situation because the 904 contour
encroached the lot on three sides.
~Jtf;f
~
tk
Com rYl ent5
mm
POv- 'fncJv
tk-
~I
(~
6\r~
tU~ .L
-to
tI t1/vI-/.M- CQ...J
~
~
~~
SI/h/~-PJ
r~
/Wj-
7~
CJ~
~
, )
o
or--
V~~MO;u
~
5", <1,/;(;
~i- ~
tUl iL c;;1a~ ~
~'-i~ /II!
1y~.
,/
~
~w4
dh.
tOO
J~ 61i/'l4
.b.~\U) ~ M~ & ~,(JiJJ-tuW
\o~Df'W, V.
"VA 17PN"
NOTICE OF HEARING
FOR VARIANCE APPLICATION
You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake Planning Commission will hold a hearing in the City Council
Chambers located at City Hall. 4629 Dakota Street S.E. on:
Date:
THURSDAY. JUNE 16. 1994
Time:
10:00 P. M.
APPLICANT:
David and Marianne Frees
Route 3. Woodhill Acres
LeSueur. Minnesota 56058
SUBJECT SITE:
6346 Conroy Street NE
Tract C. Registered Land Survey 147
Scott County. Minnesota
REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to construct a single family home as indicated on
the attached survey. In order to construct the home as proposed. the
applicant requests that the Planning Commission gram the following
variance from the requirements of Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance 86-3:
A 68' lakeshore variance from the 75' lakeshore setback requiremem.
If you are interested in this issue. you should attend the hearing. The Planning Commission will accept
oral and/or written comments. Questions related to this hearing should be directed to the Prior Lake
Planning Department by calling 447-4230 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through
Friday.
Prior Lake Planning Commission
Date Mailed: June 3. 1994
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
We are seeking variances in order to build our home in a location that
blends with the placement of the neighboring homes and is also environmentally
sensitive to the existence of an outstanding 30" oak tree (the only mature
tree on the property).
The proposed site for our home is behind a line between Paukner's residence
to the east and Conroy's home to the west. Current setbacks would place the
home far behind the current neighbors, and even further behind the possible
location of a new or renovated Conroy home.
Regarding the oak, the critical root zone for this 60-foot tree is a 24-foot
radius (see Exhibit A). When this radius is overlaid on the plot plan along
with the setback requirements, no reasonable area remains in which to build
a home. By moving the house within the 75 foot setback according to the
proposed plan, we can preserve the oak tree as well as build a home that will
blend with the neighbors and enhance the community.
F~~CJ~ '--~~~n9 ~ee>
... .i ~R-FO- ".35-5
':'><'1; ,iT ~ - see :;)89C 2.
A re you planning to - ....~ j). The Root
build or remodel a home? .~.- f h
Before YOll start, consider the .....4ii 0 t e
impact of construction on Matter. . .
plants.
Trees and shrubs contribute
to property values by enhancing
appearance, reducing noise,
cutting energt) costs, screming
unsightly views, and attracting
songbirds and other wildlife.
Unfortunately, plants meant to
be part of a home's permanent
landscape often are needlessly
damaged or killed during
constmction. Careful planning
and coordination with a tree-
care specialist and YOllr builder
can reduce damage and save you
the anguish and expense of
treating or removing injured
plants.
This publication explains
. some ,things that landowners
can do to miniinize the impact
of construction on trees. It
describes landscape protection
plans, special construction
techniques, symptoms of dam-
age, and treatment strategies.
Although the information
presented focuses on trees, it
also can. be applied ~o protecting
shrubs.
..J
University' of'
M.\nnesota "
-t\orf, <: tt \-kt \'~~.\ \ s - ~
~~ .Garvis
~r\')Jrf) ~on$Tr(Ja-ICt).u.Q!~e
Un;O. of \r)".
Trees can be damaged or killed by
a wide variety of construction activi-
ties. Some practices lead to obvious
injuries such as broken branches or
tom bark. Open wounds of this type
deplete a plant's energy resources and
provide entry points for insects, or for
diseases such as oak wilt.
Figure 1. One common method used to
define a tree's protected root zone (PRZ)
is to consider it to be the part of the
roots that lie directly below its branches
within an area known as the drlpllne.
The worst damage, however, often
remains hidden underground. Roots
are one of the most vital parts of.a tree.
They' are responsible for nutrient and
water uptake, store energy, and -
anchor the plant. BeCause they are so
important, it is critical that you protect
rootS that lie in the path of construc-
tion.
Trees are never the same shape
below'ground as they are above, so it
is difficult to predict the length or
location of the~ roots. However, w~
know that a.........,Ximatelv99 percent of
, ,
...&.m':; mot sYStem is in the tQ,p three
feet of soil. and more than half is in
the tQP one foot, The part of this root
. system in which construction damage
should be avoided is called the
Protected Root Zone (PRZ). ..
One common method Used to
identify the PRZ is to define it as the
"dripline"-the area directly below .
the braJ:iches of the tree (Figure 1).
However, many roots extend beyond
the longest branches a distance equal
to two or more times the height of the
tree. For this re,ason you should
protect as much of the area beyond the
driptme as possible.
I
5<<ause. the. 081< ~".e. '5 1&t1L
~O$t- S~;+;1lL of "II ~ees ~J
(see p.l) CL't well as M"I",-me.,
h! hf:st-~~IJA~ ~~3;l~m it' IS
~$ 'Q.lly 't lac Ahead!
, Q~ 0 You'll save time and money if you
~". develop a landscape protection plan
before construction begins. Careful
S planning will help you avoid the
expense and heartache of later repair-
..,::; 'LIt... ing or removing trees located too close
" ,"" to construction activities.
'" : '.' =~ These steps will help you create a
prrc5 ~successfullandscape protection plan:
oof :&On . 1. Mark construction zone
boundaries.
2
Figure Z. The critical root radius,
anot!1,<r m':.rnur~ used to a/2/},roxlmate.
a tree's PRZ. is the distance from the
tree trun.k rauql to 400ercent ot the
..J.r....'. bdgb,t. This method is more
appropriate where branch
spre.,ad is ;a -
,r" at'.
Unfortunately, on most sites space
is limited and this rule must be bent.
Just how close an activity can come
without seriously threatening the
survival of a tree depends upon the
species, the extent of damage, and the
plant's health. Some healthy trees can
survive after losing 50 percent of their
roots. However, other species are
extremely sensitive to root cutting,
even outside the dripline.
Table 1 shows the relative sensi-
tivity of various tree species to root
disturbance. If possible, disturb no
more than 25 percent of the roots
within the dripline for any tree,
protect intermediate species to the .~
, dripline, and allow extra space beyond
the drip line for s,ensitive species. For
.all trees, avoid needless or excessive
damage.. A qualified tree-care spe-
cialist can help you'determine how
much root interference a particular
tree can tolerate.
When dealing with trees that have
been growing in th~ f~rest or that
naturally have a narrow growth habit,
an approach called the "critical root
radius" is more accurate than the
dripline method for determining the
PRZ. This is particularly true for
columnar trees and for those where
competition has reduced the canopy
spread.
To calculate critical root radius,
estimate the tree's hei~ht and multiply
~v 40 oercent (0.40). The. ~.1t is the
aooroximate distance from the tree
trunk.in.~'''}, "rrynr::ll ::Imnunt of th~
~'c: l'oots-ma.v-be.found. Whenever
possible, isolate this a'rea trom con-" ,.
struction disturbance and treat it as
. the PRL. \rtgure 2).
Obtain a complete set of site
development plans, including the
proposed location of buildings,
driveways, sidewalks, and utility
lines. Ask the builder or architect to
mark areas where heavy equipment
will be used, where soil will be
permanently added or removed and to
what depth, and where fill and
building materials will be temporarily
stockpiled. Use a measuring tape,
stakes, and string to temporarily mark
the boundaries of construction activi-
ties on the site.
2. Inventory trees
on the site.
Record the location, size, and
health of each tree. Wilted leaves,
broken or dead limbs, trunk rot, and
thin tops are all signs of stress. Trees
that are overmature, display poor
form, lean heavily over future build-
ings, or have severe insect or disease
problems (Figure 3) should be marked
for removal prior to construction.
Also mark trees that need pruriing to
make room for future structures and
construction equipment.
3. Select the trees
to be saved.
Examine the site carefully and
note how each tree fits into the future
landscape. Keep in mind that the
builder may be able to shift the
location of a building, utility line, or
~
. ..
.
Table 1. Tree Characteristics
Species
Root Soil Soil pH
Severance6 Compaction Preference8
&: Flooding6
Mature
Tree
Height
(feet)8
Mature
Crown
Spread
(feet)8
Hazard
Tree
Rating,7
Damage-
Causing
Roots
Landscape
Value..1
.~~~:~:~~;.ce~__ ~~~~~~~ _.:; "'~:~~:~'~tt.~.... '''''~~'OO:~~-+,,_ ~~~~~~~~:~?5"-:-:- w:~..~';;;~~... ," ~ ~~~ d
.1HIQ4I(l) lll....~~.;.:. of. < ~.... ,.,:"',;.Ji~er"\-tl 'it.A.l.Vletlf\ ...iJ ... .:.;.~. -q~.... :-~.!IU~ ,,~~ ,_-..;:"x~~ ~~__ :.~~~....:.:: ~. ~'... :-: :.. ~".I't'-~
White fir Tolerant Sensitive 4.0-6.5 50-75 10-20 Medium - High
. .:;"- ~-v"'.' '.'l'.~-~vr'l":'''':r:'J' ":=r--' -'"'" "'_"'r'r.-"'- .-'kiL....,..,. -":'~f'r_."'~.~~ '. .
, ,'lWI:WCI'-lIo~i~~;;;":'h ~V1eoo~' ,,~Oet.K.c!;~. ::..~~~...,,:.:.:;: .;...~cJOr7-S~.; :...~H-:.:.... ~.t~~ ,.':ta".r..:,;.;:.'...;:v.:.~ ~.:;..i
White pine Tolerant Sensitive 4.5-6.5 80-100 50-80 Medium - High
:I.q~',''''.'~'~7J. '!-r!QI~~ ~l.tlYe.":J,:;~'I :~O:8o.-= ~~..lO~ ~~..~, ~-'Ii..4~ ~J.tiYii.~
Red pine Tolerant Sensitive 4.5-6.0 50-80 20..40 (Medium) Medium
-=~~CC~:n:~~~~~.~~.""'~~':~'~J
.lJ1aa $iii~~_..~~~~:. ~or.iiit~: i:~~iiJt::; 7~;J'..,O:~ :~70~:: ~-:~)Q.'~ ~IIIJL.:... ~J.:..~.-.if.;?~~, ~w" :.~'''-
Colorado spruce Intermediate Tolerant 4.6-6.5 50-100 20-30 Medium High
~~;~~~""'4~ ~(~ ::"'fiftiil:Oiaiiie: ft;5Sfl.sX '~l~.~~ ;~l():'!>>,~ ~'7;l ':/ :,...:;1~~..;;;;~
Black ash Tolerant Tolerant 4.1"6.5 40-70 30-60 (Medium) Medium
',,~:;~b'~~~~:::~-;~~~:;;:~;.~'~ ~;~~~~:v:r~~"~v,~ ~~
.-'ergt"ciOtli~ispeo. ~~:~ ~oler~"(;::: :':i$eilsltty,-::.;: ;:::~a~~3:'::' ',."r/S5>::tSZ:. ,. ~:.3~.;Cl ~~uin::: .~:.t~;;.;... ~LLOW-:~
Quaking aspen Tolerant Sensitive 4.8"6.5 40..60 20-35 Medium Yes Low
:)~~--=,~ :-i~~lyi2~ l:se5'silfY~; ,:;'~~1..s::::~\ ~.::!2~)();:':! ~~;15.:20~ ~~~; *~g;';;".~~ '~Bign~~
Paper birch Intermediate Sensitive', 5.0-8.0 50-70 30-50 Medium Medium
:~~~:~w~ ~~~~~~tQ~~~"Z ~~:~~~:'?:'; :r~~p ~~:J'~::~~; ~.~~:~~'~ ;~=~
:~~~~,.~~.,.,~.,.~: ~~~~ ~~~f.~t~"f~'..~'~ ~~:~~~~~~r=~~;:'~~~~ .~~~
.JNtlrinuL~~?n~-~~~TI61il~e..: ~~tr.A~ '~.:6.Q~~J:i~~~:.w:c.:uwaun~ .~,~;,~'~~
Catalpa Intermediate Tolerant 6.'..8.0 50..S0 30-50 Medium Low
:~~~~'i::~~::~ ~~~.at~ ~:~ ~f~~'~. ~~~. E, ~.' .~~~~~I~.' '~=~<!':~ill~~_"~~ ''':=~
~~=~ ~=~ ~e:~(T}>'~{{f;":4~~ ~~"~(~:'t"'-r~c~~',"~ ~~~:=;~~
r:&ner.I.(IruJ~ ~~~:.-fJ)",.".,,':iA'~';....6",..sa;((cl:o ..'1."':1..:r.W~ ~~;::.i~ ~ ':"'It';"'4$'.1iMf 0::'"""", r1I_~
Slippery elm (Tolerant) (Intermediate) 6.6-8.0 60-70 40-60 Medium Yes Low
~=~j.':~'-e:=~~s:~'~~:~~ ;~~~~Cftl2~.&t: ;I'~'~-:~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~',JOl~~;;;::fe:~~~:~~~I~~~~'~~~~~'~1i ~
~=. t~~l~~~l~'~ ~~~~~:i~~~'~~~~L~~~~~~~~. ;.~~~~". '~:"~~:~i
:~...1A:.I'";(~""'..i;S..1j;~Juo~~r-T~~'~~~I.':'~~~~1...~~~~'~.a...~ftW'~~~'
Red maple Tolerant Tolerant 4.5-7.5 50-70 40-60 Medium - . High
~~er~~i.~ ~tr.~ :..lo!.t~ler.Jl)~~: ~~:O.).~ ~~.:c.u "diiiC>.-..w:.a. ~~~ ~~ ~~ .
Sugar maple. .. Toierant. Sensitive 5.5-7.3. . 60-8060-80 . Medium. High
~~ClCt~;~~~~..v.:8i~'~~,~Ma~'
Black oak Sensitive Sensitive 6.0-6.5 50-80 50-70 Low Yes High
~r;;::~~~T~ ~~:~~~~.IH1~~t~t~~~~~. 30-50 " 'LOW
r;J~~-:&I....:IoaIit""""'.""-'--..I~~...ri...~~~';;" ..~"-, ..."'/,..", . t -
W ....Bicolor oak'- - 6.0-6.5 60-70
~ Wild plum6.5-6.6 20-25 ./15-25, low. ..M
Black walnut'" ..<J. " Sensitive '. '~:t=~~~~~':~~"""'~;~:~~~.~~~;~";;.:.~..'" . Medium'
~OWJ"""'"'rK. ~~~:ioWIY.ri>.'~I;I~~\t'''''~'~~'''':'-~======-----
I I I -
. ~mbers in column headings correspond to numbered sources in the
reference section. .
Values in parentheses reflect the authors' or technical advisors'
opinions.
*Hazard Tree Rating refers to the relative potential for a tree to
become hazardous. For a tree to be considered hazardous. a potential
'target.(e.g... a house. a sidewalk, or other trees) must be present. A
high hazard tree rating does not imply that, the tree will alw~ys fail.
**Landscape Value refers to the relative value of each species in
Minnesota based on hardiness, form, color, growth habits. flowering
and fruiting characteristics, structural strength.Jongevity, insect and
disea~e resistance. maintenance requirements, and general desirability.
.3
I
I.. - -1282.55 -
,"
I
..,...
"'~,
61'1'1
EUSnCEI
I
TLOT" A
(' .,! "
3
'. !
2
ADO'N
348.48
)
.
"'.
.
.
\
KEN JOHNSON
illiG 8 5
I
... ",."
---- -
--...
COUNTY
ROAD
~
4-2- /..
"
'it.
'. c
r~
,
~
\..01
I
.,
2
- 6
-t '1.
::;i _ c
1 ;
~ .
.eL..
r IE)
~~ J~' 9 .
tfl ~. rJI,;' ,p
! ,rlo II 12
. 11 ' '-'-
.... ~ L l;3a
, - 14
{ ~ ?
15
...,., ,
.
,WETTERLlN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
: 181752
I'~~
FREES VARIANCE
SUBJECT SITE
-~
, .
'~
FILED
STATE OF MINNESOTA
OCT 2 2 1992
scorr COUNTY COURTSIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF SCOTT
In the matter of the application of
Margaret A. Conroy, a single person,
Mary P. Conroy, a single person, and
Eileen Conroy Foxley, a single
person, to register the title to
land therein described.
Court File No. 88-12539
Applicants,
ORDER AHD DECREE
OF REG:I.:uAATION
vs.
County of Scott, et al.,
Defendants.
The above-entitled matter came on for hearing on the ~~A'/ day of
tJc;bJu..v
, 1992, at the Scott County Courthouse, City of Shakopee,
.
County of Scott, State of Minnesota, before the undersigned Judge of the
Scott county District Court~ and the Court having duly considered the
application, the Report of Examiner, the Report of Surveyor, the evidence
adduced by the applicants, along with all the files and proceedings
herein, and being fully advised in the premises, finds that all the
allegations and statements contained in the application herein are true
and correct and further finds as follows:
1. That the real property herein identified as Tract A and owned
by Eileen Conroy Foxley has a total value of $48,000.00, exclusive of
improvements, according to the last official assessment. That the real
property herein identified as Tracts Band C and owned by Margaret AI
Conroy have a total value of $50,000.00 and $23,100.00 respectively,
exclusive of improvements, according to the last official assessment.
1
2. That all the requirements of the law in respect to the
application and any amendments thereto, if any, have been complied with,
and that all of the Defendants in this proceeding have been duly served
with process as required by law or have consented to the registration
herein, and it further appears that other than Defendants Joseph Franklin
Scott and Carol A. Scott, OWen E. Paukner and Elaine V. Paukner, Dean
Gerald Brown and Doreen J. Brown, Cyril J. Schweich, Kevin J. Turner,
John Henry Turner III, William T. Butler, Richard J. Devine, James K.
Melton and Vicki J. Melton, Paul Joseph Layer, and John Gorra, acting on
behalf of Ridge Construction Company, Inc., no Defendant has answered or
appeared in this proceeding.
3. That this Court's Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and
Order dated April 6, 1992, based upon an oral stipulation of the
Applicants and all the Defendants who answered in paragraph 2 above,
provide that this action shall proceed to a final hearing as a default.
4. That, except as hereinafter provided, none of the Defendants
named in the Land Title Summons have any right, title, lien, estate or
interest in the real property which is the subject of this proceeding.
5. That the applicants and their immediate grantors and
predecessors in title have been in actual, hostile, open, continuous,
notorious and adverse possession of all the land involved, including that
part of said land formerly known as waterfront, for more than 15 years
prior to the c~.~encement of this action and have taxes thereon.
6. That the application originally filed herein identifies Eileen
Conroy Foxley as a single person. The Land Title Summons subsequently
2
issued by the Court through a scrivener's error identified Eileen Conroy
Foxley as a married person. Eileen Conroy Foxley is a single person.
7. That Tract A is occupied by Eileen Conroy Foxley, a single
person, as a summer home.
8. That at the commencement of this proceeding, Tracts Band C
were occupied by Margaret A. Conroy, a single person, and Mary P. Conroy,
a single person, as joint tenants with the right of survivorship, and
they occupied the premises as their homestead. That Mary P. Conroy died
on February 25, 1992, and an Affidavit of Survivorship of Joint Tenancy
was filed on behalf of Margaret P. Conroy on June 5, 1992, and filed with
the Scott County Recorder's Office as Document No. 296690. That Margaret
A. Conroy, a single person, now occupies Tracts Band C as her homestead.
9. That Parcel A is vested in Eileen Conroy Foxley and is not
subject to homestead.
10. That Parcels Band C are vested in Margaret A. Conroy and are
subject to homestead.
11. That Cyril J. Schweich, Jr., was recommended as a Defendant in
this action and he cannot be found and his whereabouts are unknown. He
has been served by publication.
12. That Neal I. Krzyzaniak was recommended as a Defendant in this
action and he cannot be found and his whereabouts are unknown. He has
been served by publication.
13. That John Conroy, Ellen Holden, Patrick Conroy, Thomas Conroy
were recommended as Defendants in this action, but they cannot be found
and their whereabouts are unknown. They have been served by publication.
3
"
14. That George J. Kearney was recommended as a defendant in this
action but is deceased. That his estate was probated in Scott County
Probate Court as File No. 89-05655, wherein it was determined that T.
Alice Kearney a/k/a Mrs. George J. Kearney and James J. Kearney were his
residual devisees. Said Mrs. George J. Kearney a/k/a T. Alice Kearney
was a party to this proceeding and was personally served. James J.
Kearney consented to this proceeding and his Consent is on file with the
court.
15. That Martin J. Conroy was recommended as a defendant in this
action but is deceased, and there has been no probate of his estate in
Minnesota. The unknown heirs of Martin J. Conroy have been served by
publication. The surviving joint tenant of Martin J. Conroy, his spouse,
Florence Conroy, was served.
16. That Applicants have made a due and diligent search for the
addresses of Residential Financial Corporation, Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corporation, Federated Financial Corporation, Leader Federal
Savings and Loan Association, and Lakeland Federal Savings and Loan
Association, all named as Defendants herein, and have been unable to
locate the same, and their whereabouts are unknown. They have been
served by publication.
17. That McMenny and Severson, P.A., was rec,...........ended as a Defendant
in this action and they have not been found and their whereabouts are
unknown. They have been served by publication.
18. That Parcels A, Band C are subject to a roadway easement in
favor of the City of Prior Lake as identified in Amended Final
4
certificate as to Parcel 78 dated August 12, 1976, filed August 16, 1976,
as Document No. 151423.
19. That the Applicants and Defendants, Joseph Franklin Scott and
Carol A. Scott, husband and wife, have executed and filed with the Court
a Stipulation by which the parties have agreed to amend that certain snow
fence easement as created in the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and
Order of this Court dated April 6, 1992, and have also agreed that the
final decree in this registration should contain the amended language.
20. That the Report of Surveyor dated October 5, 1989 recommends
that the Land Title Survey herein be put into form as a Registered Land
Survey and the new parcels as per the survey be labeled Tract A, Tract B,
and Tract C of the Registered Land Survey. The Report of Examiner ~ dated
March 28, 1990 adopts the Surveyor's rec~__endation.
HOW, .I..~FORE, IT IS m!.AEBY ORDERED, AI)." uuGED . AND AGIU..r.u, AS
FOLLOWS:
1. That a default as to each Defendant named in the Summons and
all heirs and devises of any of the persons named therein who are
deceased and all other persons or parties unknown claiming any right,
title, estate, lien or interest in the real estate hereinafter described
is hereby entered.
2. That Eileen Conroy Foxley, a single person, whose post office
address is 1203 North 97th Plaza, Omaha, Nebraska 68114, is the owner of
an estate in fee simple in land in the County of Scott, State of
Minnesota, described as follows:
TRACT A:
That part of Outlot A, Conroy's Bay, Scott County, Minnesota, and
that part of the waterfront as shown on said plat, lying easterly of
5
the southerly extension of the westerly line of said Outlot A and
westerly of the following described line:
Commencing at the northwest corner of said Outlot A: thence
South 70 degrees 02 minutes 09 seconds East along the northerly
line of said Outlot A, a distance of 238.90 feet to the point
of beginning of the line to be described: thence South 8
degrees 32 minutes 24 seconds East a distance of 247 feet more
or less to the shoreline of Prior Lake and there terminating.
3. That Margaret A. Conroy, a single woman, whose post office
address is 6320 N.E. Conroy, Prior Lake, state of Minnesota 55372 is the
owner of an estate in fee simple in land in the County of Scott, State of
Minnesota, described as follows:
TRACT B:
That part of Outlot A, Conroy's Bay, Scott County, Minnesota and
that part of Lot 23 of said plat and that part of the waterfront as
shown on said plat described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the northerly line of said Outlot A,
distant 238.90 feet southeasterly of the northwest corner:
thence South 70 degrees 02 minutes 09 seconds'East along said
northerly line a distance of 40. 00 feet~ thence South 87
degrees 14 minutes 58 seconds East along the northerly line of
said Outlot A, a distance of 64.29 feet to the northeast corner
of said Outlot A~ thence North 87 degrees 35 minutes 56
seconds East along the north line of said Lot 23, a distance of
20.00 feet~ thence South 8 degrees 50 minutes 15 seconds East
a distance of 92.82 feet to a point on the southerly line of
said Lot 23, distant 20.00 feet northeasterly of the southwest
corner~ thence South 7 degrees 53 minutes 07 seconds West a
distance of 155 feet more or less to the shoreline of Prior
Lake~ thence westerly along said shoreline to the intersection
with a line drawn South 8 degrees 32 minutes 24 seconds East
from the point of beginning~ thence North 8 degrees 32 minutes
24 seconds West a distance 247 feet more or less to the point
of beginning.
TRACT C:
Lot 24, Conroy's Bay, Scott County, Minnesota and that part of Lot
23, of said plat and that part of the waterfront as shown on said
plat described as follows:
Beginning at the northeast corner of said Lot 24~ thence North
87 degrees 35 minutes 56 seconds East (assumed bearing) along
the southerly line of the 20.00 foot driveway as shown on said
6
plat, a distance of 20.00 feet; thence South 1 degree 24
minutes 04 seconds East a distance of 65.00 feet; thence South
24 degrees 35 minutes 56 seconds West a distance of 223 feet
more or less to the shoreline of Prior Lake; thence westerly
along said shoreline to the intersection with a line drawn
South 7 degrees 53 minutes 07 seconds West from a point on the
southerly line of said Lot 23, distant 20.00 feet northeasterly
of the southwest corner; thence North 7 degrees 53 minutes 07
seconds East a distance of 155 feet more or less to said
southerly line; thence northerly a distance of 92.82 feet to a
point on the north line of said Lot 23, distant 20.00 feet
easterly of the northwest corner~ thence easterly along the
north line of said Lot 23, to the northwest corner of said Lot
24; thence southerly along the west line of said Lot 24, to the
southwest corner; thence northeasterly along the southerly line
of said Lot 24, to the southeast corner~ thence northerly along
the easterly line of said Lot 24, to the point of beginning.
4. That said above identified interests in the land be brought
under the provisions and operations of Chapter 508, Minnesota Statutes,
and all acts amendatory thereof, and that the title of said Applicants to
the tracts herein, be confirmed and registered as provided in and by said
act ~ "ucJECT, HOWEVER, TO ...:.:1.15 FOLLOWING:
a. To any rights or encumbrances which may be subsisting,
specified in Section 508.25, Chapter 508, Minnesota
statutes, and all acts amendatory thereof.
b. To a roadway easement in favor of the City of Prior Lake
created in Amended Final Certificate as to Parcel 78 dated
August 12, 1976, and filed August 16, 1976 in the Office
of the Scott County Recorder as Document No. 151423.
c. To a recreational easement over and across that part of
Tract A, Tract B, and Tract C lying southerly of a line
that is 15 feet northerly of the line identifying the 904
feet above mean sea level elevation on the Land Title
Survey
dated
~ ".ie!.:M.....JJi',II...,*'"..''''""'''..,.......,,p..
ill ltt.,,?!:t"~~,.'-T:''!''!f?:'~'t::~~, ~,'''l
said
easement
for
7
recrea~ional purposes and such other uses as are customary
on such riparian lakeshore property and consistent with
the joint use of the owners and easement holders,
'I --~II1~:tU1_ swimming,
sunbathing, fishing and docking of
picnicking,
boats ~
said
recreational easement shall be appurtenant to and shall
pass with the title to the following described lots:
[Schweich]
Lot 51, Conroy's Bay, Scott County, Minnesota
[Scott]
That part of Lot 39, CONROY'S BAY, Scott County, Minnesota,
according to the recorded plat thereof, described as follows:
Beginning at the northwesterly corner of Lot 39, thence southerly
along the westerly line of Lot 39 a distance of 10.10 feet, thence
easterly to the northeasterly corner of Lot 39, thence westerly
along the northerly line of Lot 39 to the point of.beginning~
Lot 40, CONROY'S BAY, Scott County, Minnesota, according to the
recorded plat thereof~ That part of Lot 41, CONROY'S BAY, Scott
County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying
southwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the easterly line of
Lot 41 distant 30.00 feet northerly of the southeasterly corner of
Lot 41 to a point on the westerly line of Lot 41 distant 27.50 feet
northerly of the southwesterly corner of Lot 41~ and
That part of the road adjacent to Lots 39, 40 and 41, CONROY'S BAY,
Scott County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof,
described as follows: Beginning at a point on the westerly line of
Lot 41, distant 27.50 feet northerly of the southwesterly corner of
Lot 41, thence northwesterly a distance of 4.70 feet along the
extension of a line drawn from a point on the easterly line of Lot
41 distant 30.00 feet northerly of the southeasterly corner of Lot
41 through the point of beginning, thence deflecting 90' 55' to the
left a distance of 48.60 feet, thence deflecting 21' 22' to the left
a distance of 36.00 feet to the southwesterly corner of Lot 40~
thence northerly along the westerly line of Lots 40 and 41 to the
point of beginning.
[Paukner]
All of Lot 39, Conroy's Bay, EXCEPT that part of Lot 39, described
as follows:
8
Beginning at the northwesterly corner of said Lot 39 and
running thence southerly along the westerly line thereof a
distance of 10.1 feet; thence easterly to the northeasterly
corner of said Lot 39~ thence westerly along the northerly line
of Lot 39 to the point of beginning; lying and being in Scott
County, Minnesota.
[Ridge Construction]
The South One Half of Lot 13, and Lots 14 and 15 Conroy's Bay, and
All that part of Government Lot 2, Section 30, Township 115, Range
21, Scott County, Minnesota described as follows:
A strip of land abutting on the western edge and contiguous to
the South One-Half of Lot 13, and Lots 14. and 15 of Conroy's
Bay, said strip of land being approximately 125 feet in length
and 15 feet in width, more or less.
[Kevin Turner]
The North Half of Lot 13, all of Lot 16, and the North 20 feet of
Lot 17, Conroy's Bay, according to the plat thereof on file and of
record in the office of the Register of Deeds, Scott County,
Minnesota.
[John Turner]
Lot 18 and that part of Lot 17, Conroy's Bay, Scott County,
Minnesota, lying South of the North 20.00 feet of said Lot 17.
[Butler]
Lot 20, Conroy's Bay, Scott County, Minnesota and that part of Lots
19 and 21, of said plat and that part of Government Lot 2, Section
30, Township 115, Range 21, Scott County, described as follows:
Beginning at the southwest corner of said Lot 20 ~ thence
easterly along the southerly line of said Lots 20 and 21, a
distance of 83.12 feet; thence northerly to a point on the
northerly line of said Lot 19, distant 72.00 feet westerly of
the northeast corner of said Lot 19~ thence West along said
northerly line of Lot 19, and its westerly extension to the
west line of said Government Lot 2~ thence South along said
west line to the shoreline of Prior Lake; thence easterly along
said shoreline a distance of 15 feet more or less to the
intersection of the southerly extension of the west line of
said Lot 20~ thence northerly along said southerly extension to
the southwest corner of said Lot 20.
[Devine]
9
All that part of Lots 4 and 5 in Conroy's Bay, according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder
in and for Scott County, Minnesota, and that part of the West 15.00
feet of Government Lot 2 in Section 30, Township 115, Range 21,
Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Beginning at the southwest corner of said Lot 5 ~ thence
westerly along the westerly extension of the southerly line of
said Lot 5, a distance of 15.00 feet to the west line of said
Government Lot 2~ thence northerly along said west line of said
Government Lot 2, a distance of 70.00 feet; thence
Northeasterly to the Northeast corner of said Lot 4~ thence
southerly along the East line of said Lots 4 and 5 to the
southeast corner of said Lot 5~ thence westerly along the South
line of said Lot 5 to the point of beginning.
[Melton]
Lot 6 and the North 20 feet of Lot 7, Conroy's Bay, according to the
plat thereof on file or of record in the Office of the County
Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota and the Westerly 15
feet, as measured at right angles, of Government Lot 2, Section 30,
Township 115, Range 21, lying Southerly of the Westerly extension of
the Northerly line of Lot 6, Conroy's Bay, and lying Northerly of
the Westerly extension of the Southerly line of the Northerly 20
feet of Lot 7, Conroy's Bay.
[Layer]
That part of Lot 7, Conroy's Bay, Scott County, Minnesota, lying
south of the north 20.00 feet and that part of Lot 8, of said plat
lying north of the south 20.00 feet. Together with that part of
Government Lot 2, Section 30, Township 115, Range 21, Scott County,
Minnesota, described as follows:
Beginning at the southwest corner of the north 20.00 feet of
said Lot 7; thence westerly along the westerly extension of the
south line of the north 20.00 feet of said Lot 7, to its
intersection with the west line of said Government Lot 2 ;
thence southerly along said west line a distance of 70 feet
more or less to its intersection with the westerly extension of
the north line of the south 20.00 feet of said Lot 8~ thence
easterly along said westerly extension to the northwest corner
of the south 20.00 feet of said Lot 8~ thence northerly along
the west line of said Lots 8 and 7, to the point of beginning.
[Brown]
Lots 53 and 54, Conroy's Bay, according to the recorded plat thereof
on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for Scott County, Minnesota, subject to covenants, restrictions,
reservations and easements of record, if any.
lO
(Said Easement created in the Findings of Fact, Conclusion of Law
and Order dated April 6, 1992 contained in Scott County Court File
No. 88-12539).
d. To a restriction that the portion of Tract C lying North
of a line that is 15 feet northerly of the line
identifying the 904 feet above mean sea level elevation on
Land Title Survey dated August 3, 1987 shall not be used
as an access to Prior Lake or to the recreational easement
area. (The restriction created in the Findings of ,Fact,
Conclusions of Law and Order dated April 6, 1992 contained
in Scott County Court File No. 88-l2539).
e. To a restriction that Tract A, Tract B, Tract C be used
for single family dwelling purposes, and that except for
the recreational easement identified herein, that no part
of Tract A, Tract B, or Tract C be used or dedicated for
use as common area for other property. (The restriction
created in the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and
Order dated April 6, 1992 contained in Scott County Court
File No. 88-12539).
f. To a restriction that no structure shall be located or
constructed on Tract C wi thin 20 feet of the easterly
boundary thereof.
(The restriction created in the
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order dated April
6, 1992 contained in Scott County Court File No. 88-
12539).
g. To an easement for the erection and maintenance of a snow
fence on that part of Tract C lying easterly of the
11
following described line:
Commencing at the northeast
corner of Tract C; thence westerly along the North line of
Tract C a distance of 20 feet to the point of beginning of
the line to be described~ thence South 1 degree 24 minutes
04 seconds East to the intersection with the Southeasterly
line of Tract C and there terminating.
This easement
shall terminate upon the earlier of the happening of the
following events: 1) the construction of a single family
residence on Tract C~ or 2) the placing and maintaining of
a permanent barrier such as a fence, trees, bushes, or
shrubbery over the same area covered by this easement.
The said easement shall be appurtenant to and pass with
the title for the following described lots in the plat of
Conroy's Bay:
The South Half of Lot 41, all of Lot 40, and that part of Lot 39
described as follows:
Beginning at the northwesterly corner of said Lot 39 and
running thence southerly along the westerly line thereof a
distance of 10.1 feet~ thence easterly to the northeasterly
corner of said Lot 39; thence westerly along the northerly line
of Lot 39 to point of beginning; and that part of the adjacent
road described as follows:
Beginning at the northwesterly corner of the South Half of
said Lot 41 and running thence westerly along the
extension of the northerly line of the South Half of Lot
41 a distance of 4.7 feet; thence deflecting 90' 55' to
the left a distance of 48.6 feet~ thence deflecting 21'
22' to the left a distance of 36 feet to the southwesterly
corner of Lot 40~ thence northerly along the westerly line
of said Lot 40 and the westerly line of the South Half of
Lot 41 to the point of beginning all according to the plat
of Conroy's Bay on file and of record in the office of the
Register of Deeds, of Scott County, Minnesota.
12
(Said easement created in the
Law and Order dated April 6,
Court File No. 88-12539).
Findings of Law, Conclusions of
1992Acontained in Scott County
a::> o.-4-""J...J b'i St:f"",lo.{ll>'l'"
5. That Eileen Conroy Foxley is 83 years of age and is under no
disability and is single.
6. That Margaret A. Conroy is 81 years of age and is under no
disability and is single.
7. That the Land Title Survey dated August 3, 1987 'herein shall be
p~t into the form of a Registered Land Survey and the new parcels as per
the survey shall be labeled Tract A, Tract B, and Tract C of the
Registered Land Survey. Said Registered Land Survey shall be filed with
the Scott County Registrar of Titles.
8. This Order shall be entered forthwith.
Decree entered this
, 1992, at
9.' 2,~
Dated at Shakopee, Minnesota
(!)~ "'h {, e.S" ,(1 ~ , 1.992
o'clock ~.m.
BY~~-~
Der&ty
9/Conroy.Reg
fl'Sl, ~ro v-cJ '. "
S\~~., ~<'--~. ~
~'6.. ~ l i'V t1X<- 0 \-- '\ l""t L~
13
031().- 33 -j/4- - f5!)!o- 0
fJ -/3 53 J /1<-. 5 I !rf)rrj
J
039/-( - rfb?-o
{j~ 80-30 /5/ frlYflT
&l-jO h -:- O[fj' - 0
to -3 () /6' froM
04-/2 6/0-0
c;l-? 'LfB' / k; 50;0 lor (J)0
{:l-{2+ 0/1-0
qH7 (,,5 frorrt/ If%coil,)c2-S' f 0/-s1.f5:7' lis /'1,)7/?f
fYWU '/ qJ[; f1~
b
C(iJr.3' ~ Ijl
~)!
----
~....._~
.,
o
0-
./
/,../
i":' t j,
" 114 /
~/ / III /
I I')I//!' )f
"''I I. .
'/ l I..... " .!
fJ ~. .~
~,'IY . /
. ...// . . / .
I ~.
1/\
./
\,
J
.J
~
~
~
DflV / d ,., IV) ar i a,n (/{/ F rt(;~
~0'f(P Cof1ro U Sf. Sf3'
I" ::: 20 I J
rf
I
I
(
, I
I
I
/
,,- ~-::~:~,~..::~::~":~...; :.. ; :',';,." ,.
.."....~.. ... .. C" .......
- ........ _.1
.-. ....
----
140 th
.. ..tIlZ." ....
COUNTY
ROAO
./'"
42
THE HARBOR
._4TH
i/..~;I.
ST.
)
.- - ISI..' -...
It " JOO"7 ,
It ~
,1ST
II .;
C
.~ (,0.
THE HARBOR
6TH
C\I
..... 3 cO
<3: ~
o:~6>
LIJ :>..J :i
cr.!' III
'ZO\"ZI\ ~ "fY
~~
)
10
BAYVI
.
34....
~\\
(1\\
I JE: \\\
~ '"'1..1 It I
...' .\ r IS: GO,,'1
~ '0'4
'~l...:' i
"
..
ZSOZ'I
AOO'N
3
"9 &1
I'....' C.
5'
71..0. ~
1'114' C'
112.':1 :1
\
\ .....-
I I
\ .~"'i:
\
\
\ "',..
;
EUSr'~E-
I . z
Al>O'N
\
,;['N JOHNSON
..IllS
10
10
~. z I
I A)O'N
I
I
I
I
I \
I
I~ ~
X
..
0
~ 155291
;:
ST, .. 1'0 ."
Z.''''' 0......
3 "
3 2
"'"
o
2
~ ..
~ .
5
_O(HESE
n'hIS
,."'1
\.. ~ \<. 'C.
322:.11'
~~\o~
Zit'"
~-=-::?
.u~o/
~
wturlll
UHI]
....00..
OAKI.ANO
It)
)
"-.
"
.'1/
/.J
IIf ~
,,< In
)'J ~
" !'!\
\
'\ "i
I(
tJ
(
,~~~r
.~ ~ ".'; ;
........ ',.,' ,"
. ..>:~-: ~t.,' i ~: .:-.':', :,~:~.:,
......,.1\, 1.\) '1.'111'; l'Ul.LU~illlli:
n. '1'0 any rights or encumbrances Which may be sUbsisting,
specified in Section _~J>. UI dt.~llllliljlibll~il"i,~.
~~_I"'~iifi1IIJ.Il!!4~li!~llllill~II\'~'II'_
b. '1'0 II roadway easement in' favor of the city of Prior Lake
created in Amended Final Certificate as to Parcel 78 dated
August 12, 1976, anll fUed ~_in the Office
of the Scott County Recorder as Document. 1/1-. 'll'
To 0 recreational easement Over and across that port of
c.
'1'ract ^, Tract 0, anll 'I'ract C lying southerly of a Hne
that is 15 feet northerly of the Hne Hlentlfyin9 the 904
feet above mean sea level elevation o'n the Land Title
,
!
Survey dated August 3,
1987 I . sa,1d easement for
recroa,tional purposes and such othor uses as are customary
on such riparian lakoshore property and consistent with
the joint Use of the owners and easement hOlders,
inclUding but 1I0t limited to swimming, picnickinq,
sunbathing,
i lshll1g and
docking of boa ts I
said
recrF!l1t.1 olln 1 "'nS~I11<!IIl: ahnl.l be appurtenant to and shall
[Schweich)
pass with the titlo to the followIng described lotsl
Lot 51, Conroy's Day, Scott County, lIinnesota
[Scott)
.;
'l'hat part of Lot 39, COIIROY'S 'BAY, Scott County, Minnesota,
accordIng to the recorded plat thereOf, described os follows I
BegInnIng lit the northwest9r),y o~rner of Lot 39, thence southerly
along the Westerly Une of Lot 39 a distance of 10.10 feet, thence
e<lsterly to the northeasterly corner of Lot 39, thence westerly
,110ng the northerly Hne of Lot 39 to the point of beginninql
Lot 40, COnROY'S BAY, Scott County, l1lnnesota, accord.1n9 to the
recorded plat thereof I 'I'hat part of Lot 41, CONROY!S BhY, Scott
County, Uinnesota, according to the recorded plat t!hereot, ,lying
southwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the easterly line of
Lot 41 distant 30.00 feet northerly ot the southeasl:t!lrly corner of
Lot 41 to a point on the westerly line of Lot 41 distant 27.50 feet
northerly of the southwesterly corner of Lot 411 and
'l'hat part of the road adjacent to Lots 39, 40 and 41, CONROY'S BAY,
Scott County, ltinneaota, according to the recorded plat thereot,
described as follows I aeginning at 11 point on the westerly Une at
Lot 41, distant :n.50 feet northerly of the southwesterly corner of
Lot "1, thence northwesterly a distance of 4.70 feet elonq the
extension of 11 line drawn from a point on tile easterly line of Lot
41 distant 30.00 feet northerly of the southeasterly corner of Lot
41 through the po.1nt ot beginning, thence deflecti,!9 90' 55' to the
left a distance of 48.60 feet, thence deflecting 2! 22' to the left
a distance of 36.00 feet to the southwesterly corner ot Lot 401
thence northerly along the west~rly line of Lots 40 and 41 to the
point of beginning.
[Paukner)
All of Lot 39, Conroy's aay, EXCEP'J' that part of Lot 39, described
as followsl
Beginning at the northwesterly corner of said Lot 39 and
running thence southerly along the westerly line thereof a
distance of 10.1 feetl thence easterly to the northeasterly
corner of said Lot 391 thence Westerly along the northerly l.1ne
of Lot 39 to the poInt of beqinningl lYing and being in Scott
County, Hinnesota.
l OJ.. VWII J
Lots 53 Rnd 54, Conroy'S any, according to the recorded pInt thereof
on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for Scott County, Minnesota, Subject to covenants, restrictions,
reservations and easements of record, if any.
I
!'
I,
I
(Said Easement. created in the Findings of Fact,.. ConClusion of Law
and Order dated April 6, 1992 contained in Scott county Court File
No. 88-12539)..
/.
,/ i
,,'.'."""
~:.
'----..
~..-..
. :',..: . .~ :'!~"" .:'(:"....,~.::.".. :.. ..'
',,' .
.h~.:;;.'
,~;,
..,:. ~ -: '.
. . .
[Ridge Construction]
'J.'he South One Half of Lot 13, and Lot.s 14 and 15 Conroy's Bay, and
All thot part of Government Lot 2, Section 30, 'l'ownship 115, Range
21, Scott County, Hinnesota described as follows:
..~
r
A strip of land ributting on the western edge and contiguous to
the South One-lIalf of Lot 13, and Lots 14 and 15 of Conroy's
Bay, said strip of land being approximately 125 feet in length
and 15 feet in width, more or less.
[Kevin Turner]
..,
'rhe North IIalf of Lot 13, all of Lot 16, and the North 20 feet of
Lot 17, Conroy's Bay, according to the plat thereof on file and of
record in the office of the Register of Deeds, Scott County,
Minnesota.
[John 'J.'urner]
,
,:
Lot 18 and that part of. Lot 17, Conroy's Bay; Scott County,
Minne~ot:n, ly.i.ng South of the North 20.00 feet of said .Lot 17..
[Butler]
'. .:. ~ ..
Lot 20, Conroy's Bay, Scott County, Minnesota and that part of Lots
19 and 21, of said pInt nnd that part of GOVernment Lot 2, Section
30, Township 115, Ranga 21, Scott County, described as follows:
Beginning at the southwest corner of said Lot 20; thence
easterly along the southerly line of said Lots 20 and 21, a
distance of 83.12 feet; thence northerly to a point on the
northerly line of said Lot 19, distant 72.00 feet westerly of
the northeast corner of said Lot 19; thence West along said
northerly line of Lot 19, and its westerly extension to the
west line of said Government Lot 2; thence South along said
west line to the shoreline of Prior Lako; thence easterly along
said shoreline a distance of 15' feet more or less to the
intersection of the southerly extension of the west line of
said Lot 20 I thence northerly along said southerly extension to
the southwest corner of said Lot 20.
:/ ;:..1 ~ ~,~:,,:~ <.;..; ~:,
[O,,\vine]
All that part of Lots" and 5 in Conroy's Bay, according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder
in and for Scott County, Minnesota, and that part of the West 15.00
feet of Government Lot 2 in Section 30, TownShip 115, Range 21,
Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Beginning at the south~)est corner of said Lot 5, thence
westerly along the westerly extension of the southerly line of
said Lot 5, a distance of 15.00 feet to the west line of said
Government Lot 21 thence northerly along said west line of said
Government Lot 2, a distance of 70.00 feet, thence
Northeasterly to the tlortheast corner of said Lot 4; thence
southerly along the East line of said Lots " and 5 to the
southeast ,corner of said Lot 5, thence Westerly along the South
line of said Lot 5 to the point of beginning.
[Melton]
Lot 6 and the North 20 feet of Lot 7, Conroy's Bay, according to the
plat thereof on file or of record in the Office of the County
Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota and the Westerly 15
feet, as measured at right angles, of Government Lot 2, Section 30,
Township 115, Range 21, lying Southerly of the Westerly extension of
the Northerly line of Lot 6, Conroy's Bay, and lying Northerly of
the Westerly extension of the Southerly line of the Northerly 20
feet of Lot 7, Conroy's Bay.
/
,..F'
[Layer]
That part of Lot 7, Conroy's Bay, Scott County, Minnesota, lying
south of the north 20.00 feet and tliat part of Lot 8, of said plat
lying north of the south 20.00 feet. Together with that part of
Government Lot, 2, Section 30, 'l'ownship 115, Range 21, Scott County,
Minnesota, descFibed as follows:
Beginning 'at the southwest corner of the north 20.00 feet of
said Lot 71 thence westerly along the westerly extension of the
south line of the north 20.00 feet of said Lot 7, . to its
intersection with the west line of said Government Lot 21
thence southerly along said west line a distance of 70 feet
more or less to its intersection with the westerly extension of
the north line of the south 20.00 feet ot said Lot 8, thence
easterly along said westerly extension to the northwest corner
of the south 20.00 f~et of said Lot 81 thence northerlr along
the west line of said Lots 8 and 7, to the point of beg nning.
, ~., .'
[Brown]
(
Lots 53 and 54, Conroy's Bay, according to the recorded plat thereof
on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for Scott County, Minnesota, subject to covenants, restrictions,
reservations and ~asements of record, if any.
.:~, ','~</~.';<.. ~;
I
i
;
.j
I
!'
,.
.
!~
..
.,'j......
,';"':;
:~, ,. ~: ">.'~
"'"'-..... :..~--..~ .~.--.~..
'. ~,',: ,,~ ~:; .
\"
"
. "'-
/.
,/ /
',' '
.......,~,.--.-.'......'Jt"';.,.,...~_,.
To an easemont for the erection and maintenance of a snow
fence on that part of Tract C lying easterly of the
following described line:
Commencing at the northeast
corner of Tract C; thence westerly along the North line of
Tract C a distance of 20 feet to the point of beginning of
the line to be descr ibed; thence South 1 degree 24 minu tes
04 seconds East to the intersection with the Southeasterly
line of Tr.act C and there terminating.
This easement
shall terminate upon the earlier. of the happening of the
fallowing events: 1) the construction of a single family
residence on Tract C; or 2) the placing and maintaining of
a permnnent bnrrier such as a fence, tr~es, bushes, or
shrubbery over the saine area covered by this easement.
The said easement ~hall be appurtenant to and pass with
the title for the following described lots in the plat of
Conroy's Bay:
The South /lalf of Lot 41, all of Lot 1\0, and that part of Lot 39
dp.scribed as follows:
Beginning at the northwesterly corner of said Lot 39 and
running thence southerly along the westerly line thereOf a
distance of 10.1 feet; thence easterly to the northeasterly
corner of said Lot 39; thence Westerly along the northerly line
of Lot 39 to point of beginning; and that part of the adjacent
road described as follows:
Beginning at the northwesterly ~orner of the South Half of
said Lot 41 and running thence westerly along the
extension of the northerly line of the South Half of Lot
41 a distance of 4.7 feet; thence deflecting 90' 55' to
the left a distance of 48.6 teet; thence deflecting 21'
22' to the left a distance of 36 feet to the southwesterly
corner of Lot 40; thence northerly along the westerly line
of said Lot 40 and the westerly line of the South Half of
Lot 41 to the point of beginning all according to the plat
of Conroy's Bay on file and of record in the office of the
Register of Deeds, of Scott County, Minnesota.
(Said easement created in the
Law and Order dated April 6,
Court File 110. 88-12539).
Findings of Law, Conclusions of
1992~contained in Scott County
a:> o.......~.....,t....1 \"1 51:y...I"-\.....,,
':i;~. '
::..';
,., :-:/1.
.
,:
s:: "
:f:
. .'.:p:\~' , .
"'f,!.'. .
,'. ',' j'.':,
" .:\'..
" :,,'
vAli/V1L
KOBLROSCH SCOTT/CARVER ABSTRACT CO., INC.
128 WEST THIRD AVENUE
P.O. BOX 355
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
(612) 445-1050
MAY 31, 1994
According to the records in the Office of the County Treasurer, Scott
County, Minnesota, the following is a list of primary taxpayers of
property lying within 100 feet of the following described property:
Tract C, R.L.S. No. 147, according to the plat thereof on file and of
record in the Office of the Registrar of Titles, Scott County, Minnesota.
Wesley R. Green
6565 Harbor Place
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Owen E. paukner and Elaine V. Paukner
6364 Conroy Street Northeast
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Joseph F. Scott and Carol A. Scott
6370 Conroy Street Northeast
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Joyce J. Gutoske
4825 60th Street West
Edina, Minnesota 55424
Scott L. Roth
6394 Conroy Street Northeast
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Eileen W. Fox1ey
1203 North 97th Plaza
Omaha, Nebraska 68114
Margaret A. Conroy
6320 Conroy Street Northeast
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
NOTE: Area marked in red on the attached half section map is a common area
described as "waterfront" in the plat of Conroys Bay. There is no primary
tax payer or parcel number listed for this tract of land.
Dated this 16th day of May, 1994 at 8 a.m.
~~
Wade KOhf:usch-Licensed Abstracter
WK/kls
"e ..- - '--
'"
()::
/
/
i J I \. II :..
I J~ \r) '.l \
o .
()-o ,\ .
~\ \
}..\ \
,\\
\ _ ~\t~t \).0,
II \
I \
j' \ '
\ '
I. \ \.'
,f \',
.f \'
\
\
.\
\
C\o6.~
\~ :it:(," ~t>,..............
,\ ,~
X'
\
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
,-
I
\0: 0
,,,,.i.t>(,G "").
~ ,.'
~ \
, I,
..-..,
y/--
./
./
Q, I \
J! I I ,;
I
I .
I .
/. '.
oJ /.
a~ I
\ "-
/ I.
.n: ;/
~. ! I r
\ /I/~'}
)J//// f
/I! ,.tl jf
, ,,7 ~, /-"
l~ \ 1!.,:'~0 / ·
\ r / .
\ .,. "
I · \ )' II ,\
\\.,. ./
\ .../I~~~ . :
,/ "
"
/
;/
/
/
(
\ \
\
\
./
/
"
/
/
I
I
I
t
. \0' I
7H a&.c.t
\
\
.I
lit
/~.
,
.
,I
,I
.J
1
\
f
1
/
//
....
S~IOO
.,1
DllV I d ~ Mo,( i 1l(1 (1(i F rt(.j
&3flu (o(lro [,. Sf. 06
111.....1)()1 v
--
---'
034-0 Conr_~LJ Str~t
Tract- C/ 1<1-. S. JL-7
JY\VID c: MAtZJAf\ f\.6
\- I<E:'"G S
--.. - - -
~
-....----- --
-~-....._....
_..~ -'.'l
.... - ..- ".'.' '.- .... -. ---
.,
"
///
// I
. ,,</ )/
/ "'- .
1 \ 0 t-.! ,'" \\'6 "'-'- ,'-
~=~~_~I.:: ~/~/
/ / "
I
/
/'
/
~o'b / ,
/ //
~.~ /1 ~
(\Olf / ...,
./
,./11// o..J<
/'
,--."/'~
0,\\
I
l "'t\~ \.VA.\..\..' . ;'
.IOP E\X .qoq,.~../'
I
I _--'
1----
,....-_1
I
I
I
,
t
I
/
/
-
).,
.l
...
Ib
_\
ti
!J
"'~--.....,
/
/
.,11
./
l~.,
/-"
OJ
l
,.
,/
I
bB' IQJ<eSho(& variance (~ue5ted
From the- 75' Jal{eShore, setbacK
retbu i rem eM
LOt ArCCL:: I~ IILf 5~. Ft
ImpervloLls Sl1r-FQL~ Cover::J~ " lCJ %
I " :::. 20 I
(P3lffo Conr~'1 5tr~t-
Tract- C/ R1-. S. 14-7
lY\VIl) ~ MA lZJA'N t\"6
\--.. l<E G S
~_..... - - -
------\---
-..-,- .. ..'l
e~ "" .' . .
~ ) '_.., - '_ ~:.- =-.....:. .,3\Q.. ~ - ...-:~-....:...:....:'- - /
.,....--.....,..----..r- . .._.. .. .1.1\\\ I \
_____----. .. ____---- _. ....' ,..-'Wl /---
,-'" "'"
\. _' _ '\\ ~ ._f,. _------_..
_..-..-., . ,. ...._ I
_..\ -.t ..........._..--1l4- -~-t~{~~?;e---...... . --.
r- \ ~c . :....~~ '~-b
~ o~S'.J rc. J
./
~~--
~ -----------
--- ---
<\\ .4-
"t. .\l.\u..
-------
--...
......
'"
\
\
,.
("
~'
\
\
"
",-""
\ .
\
\
\
\
\
\
0. 08. q
W,~t:6~
\
(\ ..
1
".
~/
/
C\\\ /"
It,)!:!
'.J".c>c ~,:"(\ 0 '" (). 6
'$~\O\." JU OIJ ~ .\...,:
, \~1. '
,
I ..
. '.. l.f II I r '/ ( \ If
J... (( ( ..' J 1 /.j f !/l17h(
r r ' " I
... .ct!". LJ! J!... clf1rj:J ,i
t 'J\b'- "1'" i' r-1~ (I { , :;; Xl
../~ I --- /;
/ I '
. ~'C \).
\& '"
iO~ q)o".1.~ ~
J.
, ..". J<f
o? / Ih
J I c/ i\
/ f/ /-" <J
~ .] I: ;
.
hB' ImSrlO(e" varianu (~uested
From th~ 75' lal{eSnore. setbacK
re1fJ U ,- re m eM
.
/
,/'
/
/
q<<f"ll
...-
Lot Area. ~ I~ liLt 5~. Ft
ImperVIous SurfaLe Cov~~" lQ%
I " ::::. 20 I
(P3lffo Conr..~y 5~), ee.-t-
TrQ6f- C/ R1-. S. 14-7
JY\V'ID ~ MARJA'i[,,'e
\-I<EGS
--.... --
-\
--.--.....-
.. -'- -. ,(
..~_. ..... M" _. -.... .- ...--
----- - '\---
. .
, ' {' .... . . -, - "., '~
OI.\O'L- .,.. -------~ '.'
00:-- a -- --- ---- - - - --. \, "
-- ---'
..-.-...... ...-.--.- -.. --..............
....
~
"
-"
-....... .-
.-.,..-' .
../
I
1- "t\'C. \..VA.LL' ~
. "TOP E\X .qoq,,~
I
I -
~____---- .J.C>C A.-no II.! ","s
f -SI.\O\.viW 0"-1 ~U-'T:
.\~1. '
I 1
I
I
t
10' I
~T atlc
/I .
C/.. (7
/
/
/
-
/ I
/ 'd. .
fit
Ij .] I~
,
bB' IaJ(eSho((; variance (~uested
From, the- 75' 'aJ<tShort- setbacK
relJJul remefl.t:
).,
I
..-
Ib
.)
t2
a
----."
~//....
"
""- C\ 0 ~
i
/
I
I
/
LOt Arc~::: 15, "Lf G~' Ft
ImperVIous Sur-FQa~ CoVef!!3& " Zq %
I " :::. 20 I