HomeMy WebLinkAbout5B - Variance Requests/ Ries, Yarusso, Britz
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
I AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE ADDRESSES:
PREPARED BY:
I PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
CASE FILE:
INTRODUCTION
PLANNING REPORT
5B
CONSIDER VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING
ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR THE REALIGNMENT OF
PROPERTY LINES ON SITES WITHIN THE
AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT
3941,3913,3877 MARSCHALL ROAD
JEFF MATZKE, PLANNER
-L YES NO-N/A
DECEMBER 11, 2006
06-187
William and Sharon Ries, Ruth and David Yarusso, and Robert and Paula Britz are
requesting variances from the Zoning Ordinance to allow for the realignment of property
lines on sites within the Agricultural (A) Zoning District. In order to realign the property
lines, the following variances are required:
1. Parcel A (Ries Property-3941 Marschall Road):
. A 0.7 foot variance from the 20 foot minimum side yard setback in the
Agricultural Zoning District (Section 1102.205).
2. Parcel B (Yarusso Property- 3913 Marschall Road):
. A 0.7 foot variance from the 20 foot minimum side yard setback in the
Agricultural Zoning District.(Section 1102.205)
. An 8.58 acre variance from the minimum required 10 acre lot area in
the Agricultural Zoning District (Section 1102.205).
3. Parcel C (Britz Property-3877 Marschall Road):
. A 7.66 acre variance from the required minimum 10 acre lot area in
the Agricultural Zoning District. (Section 1102.205).
BACKGROUND
The property is zoned Agricultural, and is guided R-RD (Rural Density) on the 2030
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The property owners of the three contiguous
parcels are proposing to realign the property lines between the three parcels to the
originally understood legal boundaries. In 1982 the property owners of Parcels A and B
(See attached survey) obtained building permits and constructed pole barns near their
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & britz\pcreport.dac f . I k
www.cnyopnorae.com
Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245
shared property line. Due to a previous survey error the shared property line was
identified as being located approximately 20 feet to the north of its actual legal location.
In recent years surveys of Parcel C and the property to the south of Parcel A were
completed. These surveys indicated to the property owners of Parcels A and B that the
locations of the two shared property lines were incorrectly represented on the previous
surveys that were created when they purchased their properties and placed the pole
barns on the sites.
DISCUSSION
Because the existing pole barn on Parcel A currently lies over the northerly property line
as a result of a previous survey error, the applicants are proposing to realign the existing
property lines to the originally interpreted locations.. In order for this to take place, a
variance from the minimum side yard setback is needed for Parcels A and B, and well as
a variance from the minimum lot area for Parcels Band C. The newly proposed
properties will be required to be replatted and recorded at the county offices. The
property owners have also requested a waiver of the platting requirements which will be
reviewed and acted upon by the City Council. The proposed realignment of the shared
property line between Parcel A and B is placed equidistant between the two existing pole
barns that were constructed; however, the structures still require a 0.7 foot variance from
the 20 foot minimum side yard setback requirement for the Agricultural Zoning District.
The lot areas of Parcels Band C are proposed to be reduced to 1.42 net acres and 2.33
net acres respectively. The further reductions in these areas will increase the
nonconformity of the lot areas (which require a minimum 10 acres in the Agricultural
District), and therefore a variance is required.
ANAL YSIS
Variance Hardship Findings
Section 1108.400 states that the Board of Adjustment may grant a variance from the
strict application of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, provided that:
1. Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a lot, or where by
reason of exceptional topographical or water conditions or other extraordinary
and exceptional conditions of such lot, the strict application of the terms of
this Ordinance would result in peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional
or undue hardship upon the owner of such lot in developing or using such lot
in a manner customary and legally permissible within the Use District in which
said lot is located.
In order to reposition the lot lines to the original interpretation variances from the side
yard setback variance, lot minimum width variance, and lot area variance area
required. Due to no fault of the property owner, the realignment of the property lines
to the original believed locations will require these variances due to the existing size
of the lots.
2. Conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to the
property or immediately adjoining property, and do not apply, generally, to
other land or structures in the Use District in which the land is located.
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & britz\pcreport.doc
2
In this unique situation, the misinterpretation of the property lines have resulted in the
owner's constructing a pole barn on a current neighboring legal property. The
granting of the variances in this case will alleviate the hardship of past survey errors
which has resulted in the misplacement of structures.
3. The granting of the proposed variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right of the owner.
The granting of the variances is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
reasonable use of the property. All three property owners are in agreement to
realign the properties so that no further confusion and/or future issues with current
structures on adjacent lots will arise.
4. The granting of the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of
light and air to the adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in
the public streets, increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety.
Granting of the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property or negatively impact public safety.
5. The granting of the variance will not unreasonably impact on the character and
development of the neighborhood, unreasonably diminish or impair
established property values in the surrounding area, or in any other way impair
the health, safety, and comfort of the area.
The granting of the variances will not impact the character and development of the
area. The area is zoned Agricultural land and the three properties will remain
approximately similar to the existing sizes.
6. The granting of the proposed variance will not be contrary to the intent of this
Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to "prevent overcrowding of land and undue
concentration of structures and population by regulating the use of land and
buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to the land surrounding them." This
purpose is implemented through required minimum setbacks, lot widths, and
minimum lot areas. In this case the granting of the variances will place all current
structures on the appropriate lots and create the best possible setbacks for these
current structures. Therefore, staff believes that the proposed variances will not be
contrary to the intent of the Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
7. The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the
applicant but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable undue hardship or
difficulty.
Granting the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but
rather is necessary to alleviate an undue hardship from the placement of current
structures on the lot many years ago through no fault of the property owner.
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & brilz\pcreport.doc
3
8. The hardship results from the application of the provisions of this Ordinance
to the affected property and does not result from actions of the owners of the
property.
The hardship results from the minimum side yard setback imposed on the current
pole barn structures. Through no fault of the property owner the lots were surveyed
incorrectly and as a result structures were placed incorrectly on the lots.
9. Increased development or construction costs or economic hardship alone
shall not be grounds for granting a variance.
Staff does not believe that increased development or construction costs or economic
hardship are the basis of this request.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the applicants are proposing to realign the existing property lines to the
originally interpreted locations. In order for this to take place, a variance from the
minimum side yard setback is needed for Parcels A and B, and well as a variance from
the minimum lot area for Parcels Band C. The three property owners are all in support
of the proposed change. The requested variances and subsequent realigned property
lines would have little impact on the existing lot shapes and sizes. Also the requested
variances would improve the position of existing structures on the lots and prevent any
further confusion on the location of the correct property lines. Based on this analysis
and the findings listed above, staff recommends approval of the requested variances.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve the variances requested by the applicant with the listed conditions, or
approve any variance the Planning Commission deems appropriate in the
circumstances.
2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose.
3. Deny the application because the Planning Commission finds a lack of demonstrated
hardship under the zoning code criteria.
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & britz\pcreport.doc
4
ACTION REQUIRED
This request requires the following motions:
4. A motion and second adopting Resolution 06-18PC approving the following
variances:
. A 0.7 foot variance from the 20 foot minimum side yard setback in the
Agricultural Zoning District (Section 1102.205).
5. A motion and second adopting Resolution 06-19PC approving the following
variances:
. A 0.7 foot variance from the 20 foot minimum side yard setback in the
Agricultural Zoning District (Section 1102.205)
. An 8.58 acre variance from the minimum required 10 acre lot area in
the Agricultural Zoning District (Section 1102.205).
6. A motion and second adopting Resolution 06-20PC approving the following
vanances:
. A 7.66 acre variance from the required minimum 10 acre lot area in
the Agricultural Zoning District. (Section 1102.205).
ATTACHMENTS
1. Location map
2. Survey
3. Applicant Narrative
4. Resolution 06-18PC
5. Resolution 06-19PC
6. Resolution 06-20PC
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & britz\pcreport.doc
5
_~_-=s VA~ A \tC=
Location Map
,-J
I
(j)
I
~
~
......
-...J
~~
~~?
~~
~p
/
\.
/
/
" /
I
N
+
- - FeE t
~ A.Rn Qap t.35O 1..BOO.,
The reason we are requesting a variance is due to the following facts:
When we purchased our home in November 1971 we were told that our property lines
were according to pins that were located right off the road and there are still pins down in
the swamp. These were the property lines that we have used and maintained since 1971.
Our neighbor to the North was Dick and Ruth Powell who purchased their home in 1972
and was also told that their property line were the same on the South and the property line
on the North was indicated by a marker that is located in a bush on their land. This is the
property line that they have used and maintained since 1972.
The neighbor north ofthe Powell's is Robert and Paula Britz who purchased their
property in 1976 and they were told that their South property line was also indicated by
that same marker located in the bush which is also the property line they have used and
maintained.
In 1982, we and the Powell's decided to put up Lester garages at the same time. We
received our City of Prior Lake building permit in July 1982 and proceeded to have the
building erected.
We became aware of a problem with the property line when Robert Britz decided to put
an addition onto his house and was required to do a survey and discovered that the south
property line went approximately 25 feet further to the South then we had believed. We
thought that the surveyor might have made a mistake until Mark Gruetzmacher (our
neighbor to the South of us who purchased the property in 1998) did his survey to have a
building moved in and realized that it is not likely that two different surveyors would
have both made a mistake. This is what has begun our challenge to correct the property
lines.
Apparently the pins that were put in on our property were done by someone (we have
been unable to determine who installed the pins) who read the lines incorrectly. When
the county removed the pins up by the road when County Road 17 was widen in 1991, we
had requested that they replace these pins when they finished and we were told that the
County had no one qualified to do that task.
Because of the error in incorrect property lines for the past 35 plus years, we now have a
comer of our Lester building on the Ruth (Powell) and Dave Yarusso's property.
Therefore we are now trying to return to the originally thought property line on the North
for ourselves, to the originally thought North and South property line for Dave and Ruth
Yarusso, and South property line for Robert and Paula Britz. All neighbors are in
agreement with this variance.
.~~ [~ @ [E 0< ill.[E "
_ J NOV 1 7 2006 ~
William and Sharon Ries
By
~/LMX RLLb
tt/~ I?~
rf[.rl;\
/ \
/ \
,::..! \\
F>' \
I I
/ I
/ I
/ )
/ /
I /
I (
";...;,,, /
.,
/
'qj ~m /
~ ~1 /
d /
i ~! /
~ -l -z-
~, ~> '~:. /
~ f! \.>)
~ ;; /
~ I~~ "~~
J~ \.>~ /
~l / 8;
~ / 9> I I~
c::1 \f.. ~ ~ Ilal
~ i. / 4 ';t... I I i Ii
~~j / ~ 4", ~ J I \ I t
~ / _" ".. (:J'
o ~4:" 4 if>
~ 't\- \- (~
.+. / J. < '" ; Ii I! 41';,
( - '" I ." .-'! ~
I / I I ~~ ~ ~
I / ! ~ ~ me I I! ~......
I _Q~,..... ~I~..- I ~ 'C. ml a .. r... - Q.o
I ~ ,p / ~ ~~i~ II L e:, ~ ~ ml ~ I r.....
;_ jlt I/'/ ~"" '\ ~. l~'l! II '. i'l..~. mu. \YJii t......./.
I -t.. ","" ... · '. II ~, ~A. - · .~ .. '.
"....".... :~ i'lt \ ~tt4P '" / .;~) ~ ~ !;~a~~~ .li~QQ.o i~1 i.. ~>,.
. ../ ~i ~f ". /~~'" ~Q.o ~Il~i~i \1; I "..,"."\ ~ \~ I-
I i~l' '. '" (..,' .tt. k 0 ~~ li~ ~.'\ ~ I ) \
.. _ __ _. _ _ _ ,/1.... ~ "~ \.' I' ...,""----~.~... i I
.....~.... ' i ....ONlrJtI,l..-JO-J_JJ.NIlfXJUOX ~: :. ../ IIN""IIII-"""J~A~:; l
I .... .. ;>-<0"" \... ..,""----,,-~'" ;. .....,,---,-.""""~.;.,' l::i=:: M.rOS&lON, I 1-1 ...ro.a.'ON. J I
Lf1--.m----d1.-.~\ .;.;:~~..~~~l~=-=-=.~ 7 -{~C&J~ - - - ~_=:;.= :;r:-~ - e2S - r\"-~~~r~ - _otrJLr : t~:! j .. - -
,,- ,:- '8;8 \ 0[9601 3. l~gLIOS ---.-.--'" a
.~.~..~-=:~~{.JM~o3~1!6~~~I!.$1~-='=-r'='=""::;-;':::!;;!:-:~\.=t!y;h~~-.:\-:;,;;~~=~,;~~~~:ttf{/;s_~~.~O/J~-=-= - ---
~ II!
g ~:~
~I~!(
~~dft!
R j
I" i
~! ~
IJ II
n!t q
J UI !i
l ",!J I '"
1 If" I
· a~ I i \
! "",. a ~
nf d
i J J
H~l H
~ ;), ';;'.
l h'l l j
~ d I J
i m il
J ~~~ P
I hi tli
!U !u
~~
~ ~I
~ !~ !~ !~ 1;1
~A AA AA Ii:
~ ~ U n =~i
C;J' I I ..1
i i i ii!
. . . .~l
I r !i111f
HIJ~liblIJ
fi hanM
!dmh':il
I t-!!IJliIJIII
· 1j!lil nl.
J illH~:li;~1
l "~dl~lid~
I ii, clidRI
J -J~li Jh~i~l~
.. I~Jln'lgl
i , , Idlo.~1
~ h h:'a J -
j ~I!'J!J ~III
l hili!~:il!1
~ ~h!i!~i!iP!
L1jl!IIHlfl!i
J ~I II aJQ I (
tlI1l;111~IJ21:
! . I~I hUh.
~
i
~ hid
~ nUl
~ u~p
Inn
Ciao!
ill~
! t
II
I~I jr]
: g ~II
=:;: ~t\
~.-< ilil
@ 6 rl'i~
f':01::'J z
J~{-~~__&
" ~ I ..I. II 0
I; I; .1j!~I!illil~1
ill il1 ~.l hli;~~
!. !l !i~!Ii!liIRJ!
1= I t= I li~!lf'llil!I~!
b b ~J' 11 n
II! llJ I' -llhl);ll
III I II "'!11'1Ii'll.
...0 ~..I f ~11'J!a ill'}
!!} ! 3.} t ~III'!I'II 3
& )1 I I J 1111' a_J
i 1 J 'I i )11 1,~tlll!:.
"'f ~ 'f ~, a"llt:"i'l
I :1' S :1' I :il'S: ~~l!lsl;
~ s ';;' s ~ 'J II~i"QI!~1
l I: I I' I l'l;ila~Ja!eff
j ~I ! d j ~R5!J1111J1 i
i 10 I I" i JI'i!le!P.IJlt
} U J at J ;JI Jllijllltf
III III 114;1 JJ&li Ii 4
a a .d,UUIClli
~
~
I ~
I S
h ~
II ~
II
~
i . -
\ \ ~
, .~
".
~!
!I
~I
n
,~
~Il
<.! I'
~,
~I
.~
, \oJ ~~
l; ;dl
;: ~I
~l~
:i!.
...J
~-
I !l
::J. i Ii!
~~. . .1
. ~
s-~ a III
. 0
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
RESOLUTION 06-18PC
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A 0.7 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT
MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK IN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. William and Sharon Ries is requesting a variance from the zoning ordinance for the
realignment of property lines on property zoned A (Agricultural) at the following
location, to wit;
3941 Marschall Road, Shakopee, MN,
The North 200 feet of the South 600 feet of Government Lot 2, Section 32,
Township 115, Range 22; and the North 50 feet of the South 650 feet of
Government Lot 2, in Section 32, Township 115 North, Range 22 West,
Scott County, Minnesota.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for the variance as contained
in Case #06-187 and held a hearing thereon on December 11,2006.
3. The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variances upon
the health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on
property values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variance on
the Comprehensive Plan.
4. In order to reposition the lot lines to the original interpretation variances from the
side yard setback variance, lot minimum width variance, and lot area variance area
required. Due to no fault of the property owner, the realignment of the property lines
to the original believed locations will require these variances due to the existing size
of the lots.
5. In this unique situation, the misinterpretation of the property lines have resulted in
the owner's constructing a pole barn on a current neighboring legal property. The
granting of the variances in this case will alleviate the hardship of past survey errors
resulting in the misplacement of structures.
6. The granting of the variances is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
reasonable use of the property. All three property owners are in agreement to
realign the properties so that no further confusion and/or future issues with current
structures on adjacent lots will arise.
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & britz\reis variance-06-18pc.doc
www.cityofpriorlake.com
1
Phone 952.4474230 / Fax 952.447.4245
7. The granting of the variances will not impact the character and development of the
area. The area is zoned Agricultural land and the three properties will remain
approximately similar to the existing sizes.
8. The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to "prevent overcrowding of land and undue
concentration of structures and population by regulating the use of land and
buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to the land surrounding them." This
purpose is implemented through required minimum setbacks, lot widths, and
minimum lot areas. In this case the granting of the variances will place all current
structures on the appropriate lots and create the best possible setbacks for these
current structures. Therefore, staff believes that the proposed variances will not be
contrary to the intent of the Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
9. Granting the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but
rather is necessary to alleviate an undue hardship from the placement of current
structures on the lot many years ago through no fault of the property owner.
10. The hardship results from the minimum side yard setback imposed on the current
pole barn structures. Through no fault of the property owner the lots were surveyed
incorrectly and as a result structures were placed incorrectly on the lots.
11. The contents of Planning Case #06-187 are hereby entered into and made a part of
the public record and the record of decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby approves the
following variances to allow for the realignment of property lines:
1. A 0.7 foot variance from the 20 foot minimum side yard setback in the
Agricultural Zoning District (Section 1102.205).
The following conditions shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a building permit
for the construction of a detached accessory structure on the subject site:
1. The resolution must be recorded at Scott County within 60 days of adoption. Proof
of recording, along with the acknowledged City Assent Form, shall be submitted to
the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on December 11, 2006.
Vaughn Lemke, Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Jane Kansier, Planning Director
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & britz\reis variance-06-18pc.doc
2
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
RESOLUTION 06-19PC
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A 0.7 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 20 FOOT
MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK AND AN 8.58 ACRE VARIANCE FROM THE
MINIMUM 10 ACRE LOT AREA IN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Ruth and David Yarusso are requesting variances from the zoning ordinance for the
realignment of property lines on property zoned A (Agricultural) at the following
location, to wit;
3913 Marschall Road, Shakopee, MN, 55379
The North 200 feet of the South 850 feet of Government Lot 2 of Section 32,
Township 115 North, Range 22 West, Scott County, Minnesota.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for the variance as contained
in Case #06-187 and held a hearing thereon on December 11,2006.
3. The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variances upon
the health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on
property values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variance on
the Comprehensive Plan.
4. In order to reposition the lot lines to the original interpretation variances from the
side yard setback variance, lot minimum width variance, and lot area variance area
required. Due to no fault of the property owner, the realignment of the property lines
to the original believed locations will require these variances due to the existing size
of the lots.
5. In this unique situation, the misinterpretation of the property lines have resulted in
the owner's constructing a pole barn on a current neighboring legal property. The
granting of the variances in this case will alleviate the hardship of past survey errors
resulting in the misplacement of structures.
6. The granting of the variances is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
reasonable use of the property. All three property owners are in agreement to
realign the properties so that no further confusion and/or future issues with current
structures on adjacent lots will arise.
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & britz\yarusso variance-06-19pc.doc
www.cityofpriorlake.com
1
Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245
7. The granting of the variances will not impact the character and development of the
area. The area is zoned Agricultural land and the three properties will remain
approximately similar to the existing sizes.
8. The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to "prevent overcrowding of land and undue
concentration of structures and population by regulating the use of land and
buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to the land surrounding them." This
purpose is implemented through required minimum setbacks, lot widths, and
minimum lot areas. In this case the granting of the variances will place all current
structures on the appropriate lots and create the best possible setbacks for these
current structures. Therefore, staff believes that the proposed variances will not be
contrary to the intent of the Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
9. Granting the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but
rather is necessary to alleviate an undue hardship from the placement of current
structures on the lot many years ago through no fault of the property owner.
10. The hardship results from the minimum side yard setback imposed on the current
pole barn structures. Through no fault of the property owner the lots were surveyed
incorrectly and as a result structures were placed incorrectly on the lots.
11. The contents of Planning Case #06-187 are hereby entered into and made a part of
the public record and the record of decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby approves the
following variances to allow for the realignment of property lines:
1. A O. 7 foot variance from the 20 foot minimum side yard setback in the
Agricultural Zoning District (Section 1102.205).
2. An 8.58 acre variance from the minimum required 10 acre lot area in the
Agricultural Zoning District (Section 1102.205).
The following conditions shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a building permit
for the construction of a detached accessory structure on the subject site:
1. The resolution must be recorded at Scott County within 60 days of adoption. Proof
of recording, along with the acknowledged City Assent Form, shall be submitted to
the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on December 11, 2006.
Vaughn Lemke, Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Jane Kansier, Planning Director
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & britz\yarusso variance-06-19pc.doc
2
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
RESOLUTION 06-20PC
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A 7.66 ACRE VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM 10
ACRE LOT AREA IN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Robert and Paula Britz are requesting variances from the zoning ordinance for the
realignment of property lines on property zoned A (Agricultural) at the following
location, to wit;
3877 Marschall Road, Shakopee, MN, 55379
The North 646.70 feet of the South 1496.70 feet of Government Lot 2 in
Section 32, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, except that part described
as follows: Parts of Government Lots 2 and 3 in Section 32, Township 115
North, Range 22 West, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the
West line of said Government Lot 2, which point bears due North 1,496.70
feet from the Southwest of said Government Lot 2; thence along the West
line of said Government Lot 2 due North 888.60 feet to the center of the
public road; thence along said road centerline the following courses and
distances: South 70 degrees 49 minutes East 1,108.60 feet; South 66
degrees 38 minutes East 201.75 feet; South 61 degrees 53 minutes East
238.78 feet; South 53 degrees 05 minutes East 127.60 feet; South 44
degrees 04 minutes East 156.78 feet to the East property line, the
termination of road centerline courses and distances; thence along said
property line South 0 degrees 31 minutes West 418.0 feet to lakeshore
base line of Howard Lake; thence along said lakeshore base line the
following course and distance: South 56 degrees 38 minutes West 282.35
feet; North 81 degrees 52 minutes West 148.10 feet; North 48 degrees 53
minutes West 139.60 feet; North 70 degrees 32 minutes West 740.0 feet;
thence North 61 degrees 01 minutes West 143.60 feet; thence due West
337.67 feet to the point of beginning, said exception containing 29.77 acres,
more or less.
2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for the variance as contained
in Case #06-187 and held a hearing thereon on December 11, 2006.
3. The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variances upon
the health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on
property values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variance on
the Comprehensive Plan.
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & britz\britz variance-06-20pc.doc
www.cityofpriorlake.com
1
Phone 952.4474230 / Fax 952.447.4245
4. In order to reposition the lot lines to the original interpretation variances from the
side yard setback variance, lot minimum width variance, and lot area variance area
required. Due to no fault of the property owner, the realignment of the property lines
to the original believed locations will require these variances due to the existing size
of the lots.
5. In this unique situation, the misinterpretation of the property lines have resulted in
the owner's constructing a pole barn on a current neighboring legal property. The
granting of the variances in this case will alleviate the hardship of past survey errors
resulting in the misplacement of structures.
6. The granting of the variances is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
reasonable use of the property. All three property owners are in agreement to
realign the properties so that no further confusion and/or future issues with current
structures on adjacent lots will arise.
7. The granting of the variances will not impact the character and development of the
area. The area is zoned Agricultural land and the three properties will remain
approximately similar to the existing sizes.
8. The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to "prevent overcrowding of land and undue
concentration of structures and population by regulating the use of land and
buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to the land surrounding them." This
purpose is implemented through required minimum setbacks, lot widths, and
minimum lot areas. In this case the granting of the variances will place all current
structures on the appropriate lots and create the best possible setbacks for these
current structures. Therefore, staff believes that the proposed variances will not be
contrary to the intent of the Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
9. Granting the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but
rather is necessary to alleviate an undue hardship from the placement of current
structures on the lot many years ago through no fault of the property owner.
10. The hardship results from the minimum side yard setback imposed on the current
pole barn structures. Through no fault of the property owner the lots were surveyed
incorrectly and as a result structures were placed incorrectly on the lots.
11. The contents of Planning Case #06-187 are hereby entered into and made a part of
the public record and the record of decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby approves the
following variances to allow for the realignment of property lines:
1. A 7.66 acre variance from the minimum required 10 acre lot area in the
Agricultural Zoning District (Section 1102.205).
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & britz\britz variance-06-20pc.doc
2
The following conditions shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a building permit
for the construction of a detached accessory structure on the subject site:
1. The resolution must be recorded at Scott County within 60 days of adoption. Proof
of recording, along with the acknowledged City Assent Form, shall be submitted to
the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on December 11, 2006.
Vaughn Lemke, Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Jane Kansier, Planning Director
1:\06 files\06 variances\reis, yarusso & britz\britz variance-06-20pc.doc
3