HomeMy WebLinkAbout7B - 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle - Case File #97-053
.....
STAFF AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
7B
JENNI TOVAR, PLANNER
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION #97-XX
AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DENYING A VARIANCE REQUEST
BY BRIAN MATTSON TO THE SIDE YARD
SETBACK FOR DRIVEWAY AND IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16575
INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE, Case File #97-053
NOVEMBER 17, 1997
INTRODUCTION:
The purpose of this item is to consider an appeal by Brian
Mattson of the decision of the Planning Commission to
deny a variance for the construction of a garage and
driveway on property located at 16575 Inguadona Beach
Circle. The applicant has been sent a copy of this report.
BACKGROUND:
Brian Mattson originally submitted an application for a 4
foot side yard setback variance to allow a setback of 1 foot
for driveway and a 24% impervious surface variance to
permit impervious surface coverage of 54% to construct a
new detached garage and driveway.
On June 23, 1997, the Planning Commission heard the
case. Upon the request of the applicant, the Planning
Commission continued the case to allow the applicant the
opportunity to modify the proposed additions to
reduce/eliminate the variance requests.
The applicant modified the proposed driveway to be
setback 2 feet, thus requesting a 3 foot. variance to the 5
foot required side yard setback. The applicant also revised
the plan to remove the existing 705 square foot driveway.
The removal of the existing driveway along with the
decreased driveway and turn around, the impervious
surface is now 36.5%. Therefore, the variance requested is
6.5% to permit impervious surface coverage of 36.5%,
rather than the maximum allowed of 30%.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\97-053CC.DOC Page 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
On October 27, 1997, the Planning Commission reviewed
the modified proposal. The staff report recommended
approval based on the revision and the absence of any
garage on the property with the condition that an easement
be obtained from the adj acent property owner for snow
storage and that run-offbe filtered per the DNR. However,
at the meeting, it became apparent that the easement would
not easily be obtained and that more impervious surface
could be removed and that significant drainage problems
exist on the lot and in the area. The Planning Commission
denied the requested variances citing that legal alternatives
exists and undue hardship is not created by literal
enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning
Commission felt that the proposed location of the drive
could be relocated to the other side of the house and
provide a 5 foot side yard setback. Also, the commission
strongly felt drainage and impervious surface could be
improved with a different site plan. Utilizing a more
appropriate design is a viable alternative to the variance
requests.
The attached minutes of the June 23, 1997 and October 27,
1997 Planning Commission meeting summarize the
discussion of this variance request. The applicant filed an
appeal of the decision on November 3, 1997.
DISCUSSION:
The Planning Commission based the denial of this variance
request on the following factors:
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result
in undue hardship with respect to the property.
This criteria goes to whether reasonable use can be
made of the property if the Ordinance is literally
enforced. In this case, there are legal alternatives for
the applicant. That is to relocate the driveway to the
other side of the house, to remove more impervious
surface, and to construct a smaller garage.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of
circumstances unique to the property.
The unique circumstances in this case are the small size
of the lot and the location of the existing house and
deck. However, there is no topographical or vegetative
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\97-053CC.DOC
Page 2
AL TERNATIVES:
RECOMMENDATION:
hardship relating to the property that warrant the
granting of a 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.
The lot is considered to be substandard. It is less than
12,000 sq. feet in area (5,607 sq. feet) and less than 86
feet wide (51 feet). Ifthe applicant reduces and
relocates the proposed addition and reduces existing
impervious surface, the setback and impervious surface
can be met and a variance will not be necessary. The
applicant has control over the proposed structure and
driveway of which their size and location are not
hardships.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this
Ordinance, produces substantial justice and is not
contrary to the public interest.
The size and location of the existing and proposed
structures on the lot are consistent with the location of
other structures in this area. The neighborhood of
Inguadona beach circle consist of small lots (under
10,000 square feet). Because the property was platted
in 1924 there are several older cabins and smaller
houses including detached garages in the area. The
property to the north is vacant and the property to the
south is a single family dwelling.
1. Adopt Resolution 97-XX denying the appeal by Brian
Mattson and upholding the decision of the Planning
Commission.
2. Approve Brian Mattson's appeal by overturning the
decision of the Planning Commission and approving
the requested variance. In this case, the Co~cil should
direct the staff to prepare a resolution with findings of
fact supporting the variance.
3. Other specific action as directed by the Council.
Alternative #1.
L:\97FILES\97V AR \97-053 \97 -053 CC.DOC
Page 3
ACTION REQUIRED:
Motion and second adopting the attached Resolution
#97-XX, denying the appeal and upholding the decision
of the Planning Commission.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\97-053CC.DOC
Page 4
RESOLUTION 97-XX
AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY A 3
FOOT VARIANCE REQUEST TO PERMIT A 2 FOOT SIDEYARD SETBACK
RATHER THAN THE REQUIRED 5 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR A
RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY AND A 6.5% VARIANCE REQUEST TO PERMIT
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE OF 36.5% RATHER THAN THE MAXIMUM
ALLOWED OF 30% FOR A PROPOSED GARAGE AND DRIVEWAY AS SHOWN IN
EXHIBIT A WITH PROPOSED REMOVALS TO IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AS
STATED IN EXHIBIT B, CASE NO. 97-053, FOR BRIAN MATTSON ON PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
MOTION BY: SECOND BY:
WHEREAS, the Prior Lake Planning Commission conducted a hearing on the 23rd day of
June and the 27th day of October, 1997, to act on setback and impervious
surface variance requests by Brian Mattson for property known as l6575
Inguadona Beach Circle; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has denied the setback variance request based on
lack of hardship as determined upon review of the hardship criteria set forth
in City Code; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has appealed the Planning Commission's decisions to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council heard the appeal on November 17, 1997; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, upon hearing the facts, concurs with the decision made by
the Planning Commission to deny the setback variance requests.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE:
FINDINGS
1. The Planning Commission held a hearing on June 23, 1997 to review a 4 foot variance
request to permit a 1 foot side yard setback for a driveway rather than the required 5 foot
setback and a 24% variance to permit impervious surface coverage of 54% rather than the
maximum allowed of 30% impervious surface coverage as drawn in Exhibit A.
2.
3. The Planning Commission held a hearing on October 27, 1997 to review a revised plan
consisting of a 3 foot variance request to permit a 2 foot side yard setback for a driveway
16200 E~~f~~~~~7-~E-p,c~itWcLake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (61!!~m7-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
rather than the required 5 foot setback and a 6.5% variance to permit impervious surface
coverage of 36.5% rather than the maximum allowed of 30% impervious surface coverage as
modified by the applicant in Exhibit B, for Brian Mattson, on property located in the R-l
(Suburban Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at the following
location, to wit;
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, legally described as:
Lot 29, Inguadona Beach, Scott County, Minnesota.
4. The Planning Commission reviewed the variance requests as contained in Case File #97-053,
and denied the setback variance requests based on the lack of hardship determined upon
review of the hardship criteria set forth in the City Code.
5. The Prior Lake City Council reviewed this appeal on November 17, 1997.
6. The City Council has considered the effect of overturning the decision of the Planning
Commission 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 variances on the
Comprehensive Plan.
7. The City Council has reviewed the hardship criteria in relation to the setback and impervious
surface variance requests for the proposed additions as shown in Exhibit A and modified in
Exhibit B.
8. The City Council has determined that there are no unique circumstances or conditions
regarding the property that are not the fault or cause of the applicants.
9. The City Council has determined that literal enforcement of the ordinance will not result in
undue hardship, as the applicant's can modify their plan including relocating the driveway to
the southern side of the house to meet setbacks and by removing the patio and proposing a
smaller garage to decrease the imperious surface to significantly reduce or eliminate the
variance to impervious surface.
10. The contents of Planning Case File #97-053 are hereby entered into and made a part of the
public record and the record of the decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the Findings set forth above, the City Council hereby denies the setback and
impervious surface variance requests and concurs with the recommendation of the Planning
Commission to deny a 3 foot variance request to permit a 2 foot side yard setback for a driveway
rather than the minimum requirement of 5 feet and a 6.5% variance request to permit impervious
surface coverage of 36.5% rather than the maximum coverage allowed of 30% for a proposed
detached garage and driveway as drawn in Exhibit A and modified by the applicant in Exhibit B,
Case No. 97-053, for Brian Mattson on property located at 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle.
Passed and adopted this 17th day of November, 1997.
1:\97files\97var\97 -05 3\ccres.doc
Page 2
- . \
Andren
Kedrowski
Mader
Schenck
Robbins
{Seal}
1: \97files\97var\97 -053 \ccres.doc
YES
Andren
Kedrowski
Mader
Schenck
Robbins
NO
City Manager,
City of Prior Lake
Page 3
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
Valley Surveying Co., F!A.
SUITE /20-C, /6670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE (612) 447-2570
EXHIBIT A
},o
~O
") I:::
L_ 1...'
SSgolS'OSOE
103.3 plot
---105.73 meas.-__
Tlu
1938.9)
-=- -~r~~~~31 -
940.il
,94O.Z
,
)
I
VZO" MAP'lf
! ~
I
941.8
(941,9)
,
~;:
0'
"'01
1:0
80
II)
-0
'?~
")(.:\
L_ oJ
~~. I::a,z)
-I to" MA.. ~ :"j
~ ~ ~ P"OPOSE~ .. ;!; IS
e G~AGE '" - ~
943.3 I 4.;) IZ"MA~ \
/ l,I!M4..IlL_zo 1_ /0-00
~ I 943.8 8 1 47.11 948,
,/ ~.
,I 2
.
'"
944.1 I~
;1--.119.71 meos.--_
..' 116.7 pial
948,2.' NSSo 54' 47'W
'"
u
..
o
GA RAGE SLAB
EL. 942...01
EXISTING
HOUS E
-2 ,......
,--I\..)
I
I
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing th" 1.ocation of
the existing imp~ovem" s and p~oposed addition, this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
NC~ES' Benchma~k ~~6.15 walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot a~ea = 5,607 sq. ft.
946.7
x
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
~
Proposed net lot cove~age = 53.8 %
(940.2) DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.82
Net existing lot cove~age = 28.0 %
o
r
SCALE
20
40
I
Revised 5/15/97 To show proposed \laroge
os d lreeled by owner.
I h.r.by c.rllly 'M' this surv.y wa. pr.pored
by me or und.r my direc' .upervi,ion and that
10,.,.. ,duly licensed Land Surveyor under the
. "'WI 01 tn. State 0''11",,''''''0, _ /1
,,~
II .~
IN
FEET
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
Impervious Surface Calculations
(To be Submitted with Building Penn it Application)
For All Properties Located in the Shoreland District (SO).
The Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted in 30 Percent.
. PAGE 2
\.....,- c'
Property Address lv~1'5. _D--l Gu ""'~'-..lA- e E.J'.'..C.t+ L.\ '(~~
Lot AreaS i ~cil Sq. Feet x 30% = .............. '~B2, 0
************************************************************************
TOT AL PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE......................
f~ pos-eP G.-AI~je
"zll_ x 20
lo x t""Z..-
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
UND~.... ...'
. Prepared By \l "'\\~ S"~~\"'.i G,. I ~ t-. .
Company DiW ~ ~...I
. .. \
HOUSE
ATTACHED GARAGE
DETACHED BLDGS
(Gara~
CD N c.. re k (e","~J...t ~ )
DRIVRW A YIP A VED AREAS
~
(Driveway-paved or not)
(Sidewalk/Parking Areas)
P A TIOSIPORCHES/DECKS
(Open Decks '1." min. opening between
boards. with a pervious surface below;
are not considered to be impervious)
O('()~1'.e~ .D~\O~\.I.iM. -k
~€~ (.~~RAtt.. €- . I
OTHER '",J
LENGTH WIDTH SQ. FEET
W.'S, ..x '2-4 = ~~L\
\"1- x ;.~ = 4v
x =
-
":-? 2.-'...p
460
''20
?
TOTAL DETACHED BUILDINGS.......................
L/ {... 2...0 '3 LI 0
6.S x 2.0 = \\0
"'Z. '-\ X <C = V,'Z..
'l.S X CO =-zo
,-\.?, ~ \"'2- 52-
TOT AL PAVED AREAS.........................................
\ocD
A
Wm~m
X
X
=
=
X
=
.T OT AL DECKS..... ...... ..... .... ..... ... ... ....... ........ ..........
=
Hoo
.., 0'-1
~~
3m
~ "Z..D
x ~
e
X qe
=
TOTAL OTHER..................................~.................... ~
3ol~.o I
L\?:> 31..0 I
Date 'S -2.. C''\ - ~--,
Phone #.'-\'-\1- "LS'7 t)
EXHIBIT B
REVISIONS
/t).-17-9/
J':(l11"-t/;~ r:
tf'I t!4 X r( eJ, .x.... r;,.prv;O<./ s. {!" Ie ,,t.. -1-'-0-,/
D!>J.,<<h ~ J q. 5 -Fi> II Dw S . -rh-s< .q/"(' _y
d'rD f' "" d C' t..-ry r: ~ . \).C/lfl Sc:- r.... ::r v.,.""",rv ,... 5 -IT-O""1
SLf ~?'" +0 56 ~
tf<;~.ooJ~ e)('i':::,"l-i~ drltJ~
te.lA1g.,l(. 'sht!<(
l)ecrct,; x IV/a....}4 ,~ dr-('I,)(!c..Ja/
-fr""", g t' ~ '7/
7&7.s- s.~ he f-
/;;Jo
CfL-f+/.J.r/;f."r-~J..(VtcI 5111(; "111
..(r".#"" ,,-F t;;.:c.r~,.1.. iy 3')1( ~
c;g8
60
..
---
9'73
~(I,/IA"c ( ~!""/(J((~
bf? c/ ~f{i ~
5()/~
973
JlIew ~efth (;'t~
-
;2~~*" .:.9r ~~?c7 (..2'4/'.':" S''l:07)
/~ j/tlt,
~'~
/657..5- ~"ftf'n'{;,_~ . .,
h'- t'I'7'o 7"" ~.....~- ~. ('r
H./ - S' ~- ? .J'-Pr;?
?/ 'f 7 c:.r..:.u..,I S-
City Council Members:
Written appeal regarding planning commissions decision on
case 97-053. Brian Mattson variance to construct a garage and
access driveway for the property located at 16575 Inguadona
Beach Circle.
My family and I are so very fortunate to have found an
affordable home with a lake view and lake access. We knew the
house was small and did not have a garage but we had hopes and
dreamed of making some future improvements.
The issue here is impervious surface and drainage. I live
next to 2 vacant substandard lots similar to mine. (lots 25 &26)
Both these lots can be built on and as close as 5 feet from
the side property lines as stated by the PC. If the PC will
consider the building of homes on lots 25 & 2~then what effect
will that have on the areas impervious surface and drainage?
How can my 7 foot driveway and 6.5% variance be denied when
the PC will openly discuss building on lots 25 & 26?
I appeal to your logic and common sense judgement. Please
do not deny my appeal. I need the full 6.5% variance and the
driveway setback variance. I can not afford any more modificatio-
ns to the existing property or I may as well sell the house
knowing well that no affordable realistic improvements are
possible.
Thank you for your consideration:
r%~~
/1-;2-~7
:'0 i :c:~ (::: :". --
I. I, -1 \ \ .:_~ "- - - ..:--=---,--- '.
1'\ :'i ---
i! l/ I I
i\(' 3 .~..'-
\u~L MOV "'
\ \
~ ,
, I.'
1\ '.... /" ';
.1.,.....0'" 1
i
i
..J
. Agreed with staff s report.
· It is mandatory to have a two car garage in Minnesota.
· The lot is substandard and the applicant has tried every way to comply.
· The DNR basically agreed with the runoff.
. There is a hardship.
Cramer:
. Agreed with staffs recommendation.
· A two car garage is appropriate for Minnesota.
· The applicant has done a great deal of work to come as close to the impervious
surface requirement as possible.
· Supports the proposal.
Stamson:
· Very hesitant to grant a variance over the 30%.
· In the past, Commissioners have generally concluded a garage is necessary.
· Staffs recommendations are down to a 2.7% variance.
· All setbacks from adjacent properties are met.
· The drainage on neighboring properties is almost non-existent. The runoff is taken
care of.
. This is a very unique circumstance.
· Supports staff s proposal.
Open discussion:
Kuykendall:
· Will support the variance given the uniqueness of the property.
· Applicant Whitney explained how she measured and maintains the green space (14 x
61 feet).
· Changed his position given the rationale applicant maintains the adjoining property to
support the request.
MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY VONHOF, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 97-
17PC GRANTING A 3% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE OF 33%
RATHER THAN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED OF 30% FOR A PROPOSED
GARAGE AND EXPANDED DRIVEWAY ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
14407 WATERS EDGE TRAIL WITH THE ADDED CONDITION GUTTERS BE
ADDED TO EACH SIDE OF THE GARAGE.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
5. Old Business:
~
B. Case #97-053 Brian Mattson Variance Continued - Request to construct a new
garage and access driveway for the property located at 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle.
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MN1 02797 .DOC
3
Planner Jenni Tovar presented the staff report dated October 27, 1997.
This request was brought before the commission in June and continued at the request of
the applicant for plan revisions to reduce the overall variance requests. Mr. Mattson is
proposing to construct a new detached garage and access driveway. There is no existing
garage on the property. No previous variances have been granted.
The existing house with deck is setback approximately 22 feet from the front property
line, 9.8 feet from the side property line to the north, approximately 10 feet from the side
property line to the south.
The applicant is proposing to construct a 480 square foot detached garage in the rear yard
with a bituminous access driveway located along the side of the principle structure to the
garage in the back. Existing impervious surface is 28%. The proposed additions with
impervious surface removal will create an overall impervious surface of 36.5%. The
Shoreland Ordinance allows a maximum impervious surface coverage of not more than
30%. The proposed driveway will be located 2 feet from the property line. The City
Code requires a minimum driveway setback of 5 feet from the side yard property line.
Therefore, the applicants are requesting a 6.5% variance to impervious surface coverage
maximum to permit coverage of 36.5%, rather than the maximum allowed of 30% and a 3
foot variance to the driveway side yard setback to allow a 2 foot driveway setback rather
than the required setback of 5 feet.
The DNR is not opposed to the location of the driveway 2 feet off the property line along
with staffs conditions as stated in their report. Tovar said staff would work with
applicant in diverting the water.
Staff Recommendation: If the Planning Commission feels a 2 car garage is reasonable,
then staff recommends approval of the variances proposed. If the Planning Commission
feels a 1 car garage is reasonable, staff recommends denying the variance request.
Mr. Matson's neighbors, Kenneth and Evelyn Falkum submitted a letter objecting to the
requested variances.
Comments from the Public:
Brian Mattson, 16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, responded to questions regarding gutters.
There is on one side of the house where the driveway would be located. Mr. Mattson said
he has been sensitive to the impervious surface and his neighborhood area. All the other
new construction above him has forced the water down the road and changed the
neighborhood. It has become a real consideration for his garage by his neighbors across
the street. One of the contingencies is a 3 foot easement for snow storage and drainage.
Tovar explained the driveway setback allowing for adequate snow storage. Mattson
explain his plan for snow removal.
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MNl 02797 .DOC
4
Dennis Falkum, 10500 OlYJll:pic Circle, Eden Prairie, is the son of the neighboring
property across the road, voiced his parents concerns for the runoff.
Comments from Commissioners:
Kuykendall:
. Questioned width and easement. Tovar explained the possible snow storage easement
between the neighbors.
. With the water problems in the neighborhood he cannot agree with the higher
impervious surface. There were no alternative proposals from the applicant to solve
the runoff problem.
. Even with a one car garage the impervious surface would be 32% percent.
. Mr. Mattson responded he is at 28% right now. He has four drivers and a boat and is
trying to deal with storing his property.
. Suggested removing the concrete patio under the deck.
. Would like to see other designs.
. Given the impact on the community suggested tabling to a future meeting.
Criego:
. Very small lot - 5,600 sq. feet. The DNR has proposed alternatives.
. A neighbor does not want to provide a snow area.
. Ifit was just 36% he could agree, but does not support using the neighbor's property
for snow storage.
Cramer:
. Agreed with Criego. Has difficulty with the two foot setback.
. The neighborhood drainage is a problem.
. The DNR wants to slow down the drainage.
. There is no "on street" parking.
. Cannot agree to grant the variance.
V onhof:
. The neighborhood has tight lots.
. The house across the street is below grade.
. Suggested to Mr. Mattson - remove the driveway to the south side of the property
which would reduce the setback and impervious surface.
. There is a reasonable alternative. Hardship criteria is not met.
. There will be a grading issue either way.
. Need for a two car garage.
Stamson:
. Agreed with Commissioners on the parking issue.
. The DNR is asking 25% impervious surface. In this neighborhood there are no curbs
or gutters.
. What is proposed will only add to the existing problems.
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MNl 02797 .DOC
5
. The neighbors can build 5 feet from the property. A total of7 feet between the two
properties will be a problem.
. This proposal has a significant negative impact on the neighborhood.
Mr. Mattson believes the primary cause of the water problems are from the newly
constructed homes. Their construction has turned the roads into a river. His driveway
construction is minimal. He understands the problem.
Kuykendall:
. Suggested purchasing the adjacent lot.
MOTION BY VONHOF, SECOND BY CRlEGO, TO DENY THE REQUESTED
VARIANCE BASED ON THE LACK OF HARDSHIP DEMONSTRATED FROM
THE ZONING CODE CRlTERlA.
Vote taken signified ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED.
6. New Business:
A. Discussion with Prior Lake Spring Lake (PLSL) Watershed District
Representative - Craig Gontarek
Mr. Gontarek began his presentation by pointing out the Watershed District has a very
marginal role in the FEMA ordinance. The only role the Watershed District maintains is
management of the outlet, which policies are dictated by the DNR. He explained the
outlet and the future with the 509 Plan (a 10 year outlook). The original outlet was
designed for flood relief, rather than flood control. They have a joint powers agreement
with the City of Shakopee and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. If the
PLSL Watershed District wants to open the outlet, they have to notify Shakopee and the
Minnesota River District. If they are having problems they have the ability to shut the
outlet off.
The Watershed is concerned with the increasing impervious surface in the system. They
would like to incorporate ponding upstream. Unfortunately the topography is not good.
The Watershed is also looking at modifications to the outlet and the affects on the
surrounding properties and Minnesota River. Construction costs are tens of millions of
dollars. Most of the problems are in the upper watershed. Mr. Gontarek mentioned the
PLSL Watershed is on the leading edge on how to address some of the problems. The
Watershed does not enforce zoning ordinances. Their primary focus has been water
quality. Funds and grants were discussed as well.
The Commissioners discussed Scott County and the Metropolitan Council's involvement
in the area. The Watershed meets with the Cities, Townships and Met Council. How land
is developed has a major impact on the watershed. Planned developments such as cluster
housing and leaving open areas are needed and should be understood and incorporated by
developers. The Watershed did not have the power to make land use decisions in the
L:\97FILES\97PLCOMM\PCMIN\MNl 02797 .DOC
6
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBJECT:
SITE:
PRESENTER:
REVIEWED BY:
PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
PLANNING REPORT
5B
CONSIDER SIDE YARD SETBACK AND IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE VARIANCES FOR BRIAN MATTSON, Case
File #97-053
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
JENNITOVAR,PLANNER
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR
YES l NO
OCTOBER 27, 1997
As the Planning Commission will recall, this was brought before the commission
in June and continued at the request of the applicant for plan revisions to reduce
the overall variance requests. Brian Mattson is proposing to construct a new
detached garage and access driveway. There is no existing garage on the
property. No previous variances have been granted.
The existing house with deck is setback approximately 22 feet from the front
property line, 9.8 feet from the side property line to the north, approximately 10
feet from the side property line to the south.
The applicant is proposing to construct a 480 square foot detached garage in
the rear yard with a bituminous access driveway located along the side of the
principle structure to the garage in the back (Exhibit A). Existing impervious
surface is 28%. The proposed additions with impervious surface removal will
create an overall impervious surface of 36.5%. The Shoreland Ordinance allows
a maximum impervious surface coverage of not more than 30% (Section 5-8-3).
The proposed driveway will be IO,cated 2 feet from the property line. The
City Code requires a minimum driveway setback of 5 feet from the side yard
property line (Section 5-5-5). Therefore, the applicants are requesting a 6.5%
variance to impervious surface coverage maximum to permit coverage of
36.5%, rather than the maximum allowed of 30% and a 3 foot variance to the
driveway side yard setback to allow a 2 foot driveway setback rather than
the required setback of 5 feet.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
.
DISCUSSION:
The lot is located in the subdivision known as I nguadona Beach (1924) and is a
non-riparian lot. The house was constructed in 1977 and a deck was added in
1989. The original house building permit does not indicate if a garage was part of
the structure (Exhibit B). The property is located within the R-1 (Suburban
Residential) and the SO (Shoreland Overlay) district. This lot is 5,607 sq. feet,
55 feet wide at the street and 51 feet wide at the rear lot line. Therefore, this lot
is a substandard lot because it does not meet the minimum lot area of 12,000 sq.
feet and lot width of 75 feet for general development lake non-riparian lots under
the current Shoreland Ordinance. No previous variances have been granted on
this property.
The proposed garage will be within the building envelope (Exhibit C) however,
the driveway will be 2 foot from the property line. Generally, the city maintains a
5 foot drainage and utility easement on side property lines. However, such
easements were not granted when the property was platted in 1924. Such is
usually the case in older plats. The issues of drainage onto the adjacent
property is a concern. Although, the adjacent property to the north is vacant
now, there is no guarantee that it will continue to be vacant in the future. Also
snow storage will be a significant problem for a driveway located 2 foot from the
property line.
The applicant originally proposed to construct the garage with an 8 foot wide
bituminous driveway 1 foot from the side property line. Since the first hearing in
June, the applicant has proposed to reduce the impervious surface by removing
the existing driveway in the front yard, removing the shed, decreasing the width
of the proposed driveway to 7 feet and by reducing the proposed turn around
area by 60 square feet. The resulting impervious surface is 36.5% compared to
the original request of 54%. In addition to the reduced impervious surface, the
side yard setback of the proposed driveway is 2 feet compared to the original
proposal of 1 foot.
The ONR responded to the original variance request in a letter dated June 19,
1997. The ON R was not opposed to the location of the proposed garage, and
recommended removal of the existing concrete drive to reduce the impervious
surface. In comments on the revised request, the ONR recommends that if the
variance to impervious surface is granted, that conditions be placed on the
property that reduce the overall rate of run-off! provide filtering of the run off.
The ONR is not opposed to the side yard setback variance request.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97 -053\97 -53PC4.DOC
Page 2
VARIANCE HARDSHIP STANDARDS
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship
with respect to the property.
This criteria goes to whether reasonable use can be made of the property if
the Ordinance is literally enforced. In this case, the lot does have existing off-
street parking but no garage. As revised, there is no reasonable legal
alternative for the reducing the variance request further.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique
to the property.
There are unique circumstances in this case. The size of the lot is
considerably smaller than the ordinance requires and was platted in 1924.
The applicant has reduced the impervious surface 973 square feet resulting
in a decrease to impervious surface of 17.5%. The applicant can meet all
structural setbacks. The variance to side yard setback for the driveway
cannot be eliminated. Due to the placement of the existing structure, the
driveway cannot be placed on the south side of the house without entirely
removing the stairs from the deck.
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.
The lot is considered to be substandard. It is under 12,000 sq. feet in area
(5,607 sq. feet) and 86 feet wide. The location of the structure is of no
control of the applicant. The applicant has considerably reduced the variance
requests to present hardship that is beyond the control of the applicant via
design/placement of the proposed garage and driveway. The hardship is
caused by the provisions of the Ordinance and is not the result of the
applicants proposed building and drive locations.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces
substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest.
The spirit and intent of the impervious surface maximum in the Shoreland
District is to reduce storm water run-off, which will eventually drains into the
lake. The intent of the 5 foot side yard setback for driveways is to protect
drainage and utility easements and to allow for snow storage and automobile
overhangs. The granting of the requested variances can meet the intent of
the Ordinance and be of the best public interest with condition that the
applicant create a drainage swale to decrease the rate of run-off as
recommended by the DNR and if the applicant obtains an easement from the
adjacent property owner for snow storage.
L:\97FI LES\97V AR\97 -053\97 -53PC4. DOC
Page 3
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the variances requested by the applicant, or approve any variances
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.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff has concluded that the intent of the applicant to construct a garage is
reasonable and the revisions to the plan to decrease the impervious surface and
driveway setback have proven that hardship does exists. This hardship is based
on the size of the lot and the non-existence of a garage. The intent of the
ordinance can be met with the two recommended conditions.
ACTION REQUIRED:
A motion adopting Resolution 97 -15PC.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97 -053\97 -53PC4.DOC
Page 4
RESOLUTION 97-15PC
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A 3 FOOT VARIANCE REQUEST TO PERMIT
A 2 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK RATHER THAN THE MINIMUM
REQUIREMENT OF 5 FEET AND A 6.5 PERCENT VARIANCE REQUEST TO
PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE OF 36.5 PERCENT RATHER THAN THE
MAXIMUM ALLOWED OF 30 PERCENT FOR A PROPOSED GARAGE AND
DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16575 INGUADONA BEACH
CIRCLE FOR BRIAN MATTSON.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota;
FINDINGS
1. Brian Mattson has applied for a variance from Section 5-5-5 and Section 5-8-3 of the
City Code in order to permit the construction of a 480 square foot detached garage
and bituminous access driveway on property located in the R-l (Suburban
Residential) District and the SD (Shoreland Overlay) District at the following
location, to wit;
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle, legally described as Lot 29, Inguadona Beach,
Scott County, MN
1. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variance as contained in
Case #97-053 and held hearings thereon on June 23, 1997 and October 27, 1997.
2. The Board of Adjustment has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the
health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property
values in the surrounding area and the effect of the proposed variance on the
Comprehensive Plan.
3. The applicant originally requested ,impervious surface of 54% and a driveway setback
of 1 foot. At the June 23, 1997 hearing, the applicant requested the hearing be
continued until a revised survey could be submitted. The applicant has revised the
driveway setback and proposed impervious surface by removing the existing
driveway and shed and reducing the width of the proposed driveway
4. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. The variance will not serve merely as a
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E.. Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
convenience to the applicants. and is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship as
no reasonable alternatives exist.
5. The DNR has no recommendation on approval, but suggest if approved, a condition
such as a drainage swale to decrease rate of run-off from the additional impervious
surface be constructed.
6. The contents of Planning Case 97-053 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 for the proposed garage and driveway as shown in Exhibit A;
1. A 3 foot variance permitting a 2 foot driveway setback from the side yard
instead of the required 5 foot setback.
2. A 6.5 percent variance to permit impervious surface coverage of 36.5 percent
instead of the maximum allowed of30 percent.
The approval of the variances is contingent upon the following conditions:
1. A revised survey must be submitted, indicating the applicants proposed
changes to decrease the impervious surface to 36.5%.
2. A minimum 3 foot drainage easement must be obtained and recorded, for the
applicant's snow storage and drainage, on Lot 26, Inguadona Beach.
3. As recommend by the DNR, additional impervious surface must be diverted to
a swale or holding area to decrease the rate of run-off.
Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on October 27, 1997.
Anthony Stamson, Chair
ATTEST:
Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
1:\97var\97 -053va\97 -0 15re.doc
2
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUAOONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
Valley Surveying Co., P.A.
SUITE 120-C, 16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE (6/2) 447-2570
EXHIBIT A
~o
"40.2
,
FENCE' 1,5'
WEST
r) I~
t.._ \.)
S S9"IS'OS"E
103.3 plar
---105.73 m.os.-__
rlu
1938.9)
f ,939~4 --
- ~~ 11l39,Jl
,941.2
140.;'
r)(.\
'-- -../
)
I "".3 .~40,2 I
/,/& 20
r!1. 00" M'.. ~
- .en
/ a : ;t"OPOSEO~ :
~ (J~AGI!:
,943.3 I r.;;; IZ" ~AP'U
/ ~1(!l44.lIL_20 1_ 10~0
'" I 943.8 8 (47.1) 948.
~I ./" . I
f 0
, - I
( 941,9)
;)
",'
;; 1.5
,
'"
9<44,/ l~
01,---119.71 meos.-._
'" f 116.7 plol
'...2,' NSS.S4'47"W
O.S' eAST
! !
G4A4GE SL4S
EL. 942..01
E'XISTING
HOUSE'
-.z "
,-l\..)
I
I
DESCRIPTla.~ :
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota" ,\1so showing thl< .1.o~ation of
thg existing impr:ovem." sand pr:oposed addition, this 16th day of cab. 1':196.
:',(Il'ES' Benchmar:!< 4,<6.15 walkout elevation of the existing hnuse.
Net lot ar:ea = 5,607 sq. ft"
946,7
.
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
~
Net existing lot cover:age = 28.0 %
Proposed net lot covecage = 53.8 %
(940.2) DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLAS AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF 8LOCK OF GARAGE AT EL, 947.82
IN
FEET
40
!
ReVIsed 5115/97 To .how proposed QaraQ'
os directed ~y owner
I hl!r~by cerf,fy that ,,,,S Jurv.y was pr~par'!d
by m~ or under my d;r~t SUPHVls;on and rhot
, OfTL a ,duIY'lcen!ed Land SlUVeyor 'Jndl!r the
lOw. "f !1'1e Stofe .,f -\fjnn~9nto
o
r
SC~L=
20
Ill,,'
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF PRIORLAKE
Impervious Surface Calculations
(To be Submitted with Building Permit Application)
For All Properties Located in the Shoreland District (SD).
The rvlaximum Impervious Surface Coverage Permitted in 30 Percent.
. PAGE 2
Property Address \lRS'16. . --:1:N Gu l\o.\t::)O\-..iPr-~ e~~ L\X~LlG
Lot Area 5, ~ 0-1 Sq. Feet x 30% = .............. '~B"Z.I 0
************************************************************************
LENGTH WIDTH SQ, FEET
24 '".......,.....,~
HOUSE -v8.~ . . x = L?~L.\
\1.- x ;.~ = 'Y--z...-
ATTACHED GARAGE x =
DETACHED BLDGS
(Gara~
TOT AL PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE......................
pfZw pcseiY'I G-Al~~..se
"z'<-L x 20
to X \'-
-:-(2-Cp
L{6o
\'20
'>
TOT AL DETACHED BUILDINGS....................... \.oOD
C.ONe... rek (eY-~'Rt) l-"l -I- 2...0 3L1o
DRIVRWAYIPAVED A AS 6.S x 2..0 = \ \ 0
~
(Driveway-paved or not) "Z.'-\ X <C = \ ~ -z..
(SidewalkIParking Areas) 1.."5 X 8 = -zo
4.:' .J..:.\"Z- Sz- .
TOT AL PAVED ARE.AS......................................... ~.~~41\'-\
P A TIOSIPORCHESIDECKS
x
=
(Open Decks W' min. opening between
boards, with a pervious surface below;
are not considered to be impervious)
x
=
x
=
OCl) PS;5.eJ! .D~\U~\.~f\..Il -k
~el,,'~ C~~~ €.--
OTEiER ....,J
TOT AL DECKS... ................, .................. ............... ...
.~ "Z..i,)
X ~
e
X q$
=
\(00
,0'4
\\c
58
3cn
=
TOT AL OTHER.....~................................................. ~
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
UND~. .,
Prep ared B y\1 '" \ \"'\ S" "-" ,,,\ 'j c." ~ l>- .
Company U~ ~ f..~
\
Phone #.'--\'-\1 - 'LS"7 t:>
OCT-17-97 11:33 PM
P _ 1211 .
EXHIBIT A
REVISIONS
/ tJ.-/7-?,?
~;1L1 '-'1&Ud r: .
tflle4x r( c/, x.. r:..prviC<,(!>. (!, Ie w 10l-fO "1
Dt>.;"oJc~J 'is -F"IIDWS . -r-h6c ""(" _.,,-
t!'rbl" ""'d c k-ryc ~ . bzUdl5G r", r",.,,;,VV,ifo< S -FO"'-1
S~~?v +0 36~
tf<;..-f.().J(' eJC.i ~'f-;-:J drlt.J~
Ie IA1P..J(. .5>h4:(
b>ecrc~ X: t,) 1d'....J.4 ,~ drl't.Jt:: loJd/
.fr"..., g' (' ~() '7/
7cO.s-.s.:z t=c.c f--
/..;20
C",-r+UfU<< ~~'-lVrd S/tJ {; ,f VI
.;;-~,.,-r tJ~ ~r~,.!- o'y 3'..:< ~
~8
60
...
----
9'73
~r '1 /vt..c ( ~"'c.'/o,(~
be c/ ~12' ~
j1few ~er(),~~S:.
::0/ ~
973
;:2~~~ ePr :5'(, "?D (2'~'1/:':' S~7)
~~ Yf/t,
~'~
/6.57.5;:.- ~"f'dilt'c,_~
#- o/"ro 7".~.....~- ~. c-
4/ - 7' 3~- P .5d'r?
q'r7 4-~YS-
STRUCTURE AS ORIGINALLY BUILT
"~;.";'."
L'
"/;
,
I
lIZ'.
-----~
/ ,
/
/'/
/
0.;1'
_22 I
-' /--/ -------' .' / - ------------
. / ~ //'->-
/~~/~I 1If.'7~p;G.! / /'-;>-/" -- j/
/ ..~~ ;. / ,./ -
// / _ _ _ - / ~h / //.. /1 /.. :
//.. I ~- - / (,L.?-:;>
/ ~/ / / U-'
/ /" / ~?--'-- /
/ "~~l/ . /,//~~- -;-:;:~ //.- - Lr-."J>,/,//~?-////I/iJ.3 .J
,..f // /' " J d _____// __/ ~ u,.;-;
-' /' /------- ~ .// . /"
--
~~7
----
//
.,/- .r.2s
,----- ~
)..
'i
~
~
,
()
l\
94'
,
,-
O,-D ....
.... ....
130.0.
t ".;
~, :L.:;",~~>i;J~:.~~"t".J FlJUN:>~1
,i~:~'""..;..,:1,%i~~/;,:,ii.~.f~.,i.;~1~;,,',.';;-5""."':~.."".,,:,.."", "-,-~,~:'~"u',~.:~,_:,.:,,;;r,;~:p,,,.:.,,;?'::=;i:'2. v, n ,-, ' , "
_~. ~;!:!Eo..", ~='!t:" ~~ .~ L::JMi< !!!!;~.' ~ ",...... ~i ,:J~~;:~f:-;";':;" "
EXHIBIT B
.
. -
. '
. ;-. 't-." ~
25)<;
::.UHVl:.t I-'HI:.t-'At-<I:.U rut-<.
BRIAN MATTSON
16575 INGUADONA BEACH CIRCLE
PRIOR LAKE, MN. 55372
Valley Surveying Co., P. A.
SUITE 120-C, /6670 FRANKLIN TRAIL
FRANKLIN TRAIL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TELEPHONE (612) 447-2570
EXHIBIT C
LEGAL BUILDING ENVELOPE
~o
1") ,::
L_ \..J
- - -105.73 ineos. ___
--,
I
",
0'
'"
E:
I()
o
,;
~:-..119, 71 moas.._
.,
FENC E 0.5' EAST
"
:.:
o
GARAGE SLAB
E'L. 942-01
EXISTING
HOUSE
'? "
,-IU
DESCRIPTION:
Lot 29, "INGUADONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing th<< .location of
th~ existing impC'ovem," sand pC'oposed addition, this 16th day of Feb. 1996.
N(~ES' BenchmaC'k ~~6.15 walkout elevation of the existing house.
~
Net lot aC'ea = 5,607 sq. ft. 946,7
.
Net existing lot coveC'age = 28.0 % (940,2)
1510S'~ H.
PC'oposed net lot coveC'age = 53.9 %
DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
30 II ~, f1 .
) (.;it); ((\
. -:;;"'f'''~
DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
SET GARAGE SLA9 AT EL. 940.34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.82
100 "I. -;,,,,; .
\ ;(. !"I"n , I) f
;;2;1.\'1 wIll-, C..v"C.c" ;,"",d =; '(,
"'" J"'~" ,I''\v (
o
[
SCALE
20
40
I
Revised 5/15/97 To show proposed garage
as directed by owner.
I her.by cer'ify 'ho' this ..""ey w". propared
by me or under my dir~' supervi,ion and thot
I am." .dIlly licensed Land Sc.wveyor under 'lie
....~. 1'1' 'he q,..... ..., Minn__''''
IN
FEET
SENT BY: DNR METRO;
10-21-97 10:04;
6127727573 =>
6124474245;
#1 /1
Minnesota Dcparlrncnt of Natural Resources
Metro Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul. MN 55106-6793
Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977
October 20. 1997
Ms. Jenni Tovar
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Cn::ck Ave. SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: MA TISON IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AND SIDEY ARD SJ:::THAC.l( V ARTANCE RBQUEST. CITY Of
PRiOR LAKE. SCOTT COUNTY
and
WIDTNEY IMPHR VIOUS SURF ACE VARIANCE REQUEST. CITY OF PRlOR LAKE. SCOTT
COUNTY
Dear 'Ms. T OVal':
The: Department ofNlllurlil Re~urces (DNR) hA.1 rl;Vicwal thc information you submitt~ reglll'ding the above
referenced reqlJeSlB (L) vary the shoreland stancardK dealing with impervious swface and sideyard setbacks in the City of
Prior Lue. Bl1:loCd on our review of the request. dal.a., and map:! of the area, we have the following cammcnblu uLrer;
Both applicants are applying far variances which would allow similar impervious surt8cc increases relative to the City of
Prior Lake's Ordinance. Mr. Mattson has applied for a 6.5% Varllll1CC and Ms. Whilnc:y has requested 5.5'4.. Although
1bcsc proposed increases appears to be a small percentAge in relation to 'the City's Ordinance, it should be naLcd that the
City ofP'rior Lake's Ordinancc is currently less restrictive than the statewide st.andanb fur management of sbareland
areas which require a maximum impervious swface coverage oflols no greater than 250/..
If a variance is granted. we suggest that conditions be added to olf-set the impacts ufthe addilional impervious surface
lIlCa. One,uch condition wuuld be to require the landowner to create an area. on site, such as a grllSS swale, which will
initially cantain wllter and n:lCllSC it III dClCI'clLllCd rlllc. lIS well lIS. hs:lp lo act as a filter for ~immts and/or pollutants.
The DNR has no concerns regarding Mr. Mattson' s sideyud setback variance request provided that all other setbacks
IIlC rm:l
Thank you for the opportunity to comment Plea:lC cuntJICl me at 772.7910 should YOIl have questions.
('";.$.~cereIY. I .
\\~:t (lk'~. ,....... .,~; .
\1 . .. .~
\ ~', ", . .
Pat Lynch " ;
Area I Tydrologist \J
.)
PNI~ 1"11I"""li...,, hL' }.l)t. hi ~). I KOO.)l'lh-t)lJtllI . TTY: flI2.1'.I6-5~l<4. l_l(f)I)_I>:,7..\I)~I)
\n btU~11 Ot'p~\IIU:III~ \;111(111",\':1
\\'!II'I V..II~~':' nl'lo<.!r:~il~'
ft Pl'i.'h.'.I,'", R~..'y,;l~'d P.lre' C'~I~I.:iuil:~ ;,
c.~ '\1111111:1I11"llaf 1[1''; P"'I.C'lIl"II~"I'r \)/;"'1'
SENT BY: DNR METRO;
6-19-97 10:34;
6127727573 =>
6124474245;
#1/2
Minnesota DcpartITICnl of Natural Resources
Metro Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793
Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977
JW1C 19, 1997
Mr, ()on Rye
Pltmning Director
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714
Co.lOepl.
Phon.. II
(~
Post-It" Fax Note
To
Cg.
Phon... /I
ril~ "
RE: HINES SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST (SPRING LAKE) AND MATTSON SIDEYARD AND
IMPERViOUS SURFACE COVERAGB VARlANCE REQUEST
Dear Mr. Rye:
I have received the hearing notices for the subject variancc rcqucsls which will be considered by the Prior Lake Planning
Commission on June 23, 1997. Please include the following comments into Ihe oJliciaJ record ofthc hearing.
HINES OIlW SETBACK VARIANCE REOUEST
The cily of Prior Lake recently amended lhcir ordinance to reflCCl a relaxation of the lake setback sLandard for Priol'
and Spring Lakes. The required setback is 75'. It is recommended the variance as requc!>tcd be denied, 'fhe deck si/.c
depicted on the survey which accompanied the hcMing notice appears to have placed little regard for the setback
n:quiremellt in its design. T note the structures on eiLher side of tile Hines' properly un: setback ill 51' and 46'. The
DNR recommends Lhe applicant re-design the proposed. improvemcnlS to meet the required seLback. There appears
ample buildable area to the west and north of the existing sLruetw'e. 1n ~cidilion, the property currenUy has a deck. If
Ihe existing deck is in a slate of disrepair, the DNR is not opposed to rcconsLruction at the exi!>ting loc.i(,ion, and to the
exisLing dimensions of the current deck. It will be dilTicult to argue hardship in this case.
MA TISON IMPJl:RVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE AND SIUEY ARD SETBACK V ART ANC~
The subject lot is very small (5,607 square feeL). and is relatively na/TOW. The potential for additional dcvclopmclll
011 the lot wilhout (,he need for multiple \.'arlWlces is limited. The DNR is not opposed to lhc eonsLnlctiol1 of a gnrogc
at the proposed location, provided an equnl amount of impervious surface is removed. It appears that Ulel'e is ;l
significant alnount of concrete on the west side of the pruperty which could be removed to balance the additional
impervious of the proposed new garage. Another oplion, perhaps more suitable in Lcrms of impervious surface, would
be to construct a garage on the existing concrete slab. This would result in the elimination of the need for variances
from impervious surface and from the sidcyard setback. It would, however. most likely require a variance from the road
setback. The DNR would not be opposed to the road setback varinnce. As proposed, the DNR recommends denial
of the vzuianec for impervious sUTfacc coverage of 54%.
f>l'iR [1l,.....fIlmti...lI: (;1 1-1')t'I.t1 1.'7. I-Hl)()-7hh.f,/UIO . TTY, ",1.' ')'1(.' ~~H4. 1.l,(l..IlJ-o.~"/-.l'.)19
,-\11 bplal ()I'I'orlllllit\ IimplllVI'"
""'hll \':lIlh" 1)i\".'r...ilY
ft '...j.Hl..... (,III t(f.;t..~.I..k.u f'Jp":l ('j1rlliIIllHl." ,.
'-.I \1iulllIUIII (11 1("'''; I'mil ('I~ll'alllh'r \.V.J';ll"
SENT BY: DNR METRO;
6 - 1 9 - 97 1 0 : 35 ;
6127727573 =>
6124474245;
#2/2
DOll Rye
Junl,; 19, 1997
page 2
Please enlcr these DNR objections into the hearing record. If you have Ill1Y qucsLions or comments regarding DNR
rcvicw of the pending shorellll\d issues, plcilSQ call me ilt 772.7910.
Sincerely,
?~~ciU.
Patrick 1. Lynch III
Area Hydrologist
Planning Case File No. g~-~53
Property Identification No. 0 $' O~ 70
City of Prior Lake
LAND USE APPLICATION
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. / Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Phone (612) 447-4230, Fax (612) 447-4245
Type of Application: Brief description of proposed project (attach additional
o Rezoning, from -
(present zonin~) sheets/narrative if desired)
to (proposed zonine) (j31A,'ld {jarti:J (~/
o Amendment to City Code, Compo Plan or City Ordinance
o Subdivision of Land
o Administrative Subdivision
o Conditional Use Permit
Jii'{ Variance Appli.cable Ordinance Section(s):
o Other: 12' :t="'vYlf.lr"V ,'lJ~ ~ ur th:Je.u
I ""tk rtlilf c?+bot'K
Applicant(s): (j] ~/a III ~~V'1
Address: /hS 7 ~ IiA.J tI~ dt1-;'J4 4.//e{. Cr, 5.W.
Home Phone: ?/tfo /.f?~S- Work Phone: ~3S ~S,,/
Property Owner(s) [If different from Applicants]:
Address:
Home Phone: Work Phone:
Type of Ownership: Fee _ Contract for Deed _ Purchase Agreement -----""
Legal Description of Property (Attach a copy if there is not enough space on this sheet):
L.tTf ~9 T/ft:1LUI c&rl4 ~d{, t-,
i/
To the best of my knowledge the information provided in this application and other material submitted is correct. In
addition, I have read the relevant sections of the Prior Lake Ordinance and procedural guidelines, and understand that
applications will not be processed until deemed complete by the Planning Director or assignee.
~~ 6"'2-97
Applicant's Signature Date
Fee Owner's Signature Date
THIS SPACE TO BE FILLED IN BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR OR DESIGNEE
PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED DENIED DATE OF HEARING
CITY COUNCIL APPROVED DENIED DATE OF HEARING
CONDITIONS:
Signature of Planning Director or Designee Date
lu-app2.doc
~ iut /21 rl j Co j4rl1'11 /5.sJ0I4 :
~
Mvle a -Fd1M//Y ~-f' S~ h')t/5;e ?z;fS no ..g;f?J/''lC S/4~e. c?'t:lt?r'/t:26/e:."
?/ -F-twz,'!y t41t'~ 6<r.s jUIH {}~/-S t? u./- Wt'rU r C~rrt.v?-f Iy
!1.hJ(2. -1-0 r:;/4'rK /Y1 s+rcc-r- L7r J/? /?~~jd:"71-S t/~e"rif /~r-
;:'. /1y h,me d- )1e;y~6()r5 hPJM.G- Wer~ bt(/If'tln Ip'B -I-hk( .
WrLftA-'T /(J~~{lr fl('~cf ~r (lJrVSt.4( /crt exp7l'ct;nlltJ~..5_ I & /1"-!-
hade:... any /erJ~ ;!1'n)und r:?;!<('c;:rr-n:Jr ~ SIlt--tdb&y t?'''1 c>.,..f('r~ /cd-;
:3, -tAc S/k crF ~k~ /c-!- r.;? Cur/,~.A..-; ;7/,,::lcle /ewe.-.. s 1'10
aHerVt~'five.s. bu~ ~o Hie rUy f/'if/lxd t//Ii')~cc-.S~
-:z::: w/slt -f he- IIJ~ /..JJ" rei htl.t.l~ leer/! t::( ~'TT/(' L~'uycr
C{Vld Q .reI15hza.?(c.. Ci'I'k"UnT dT .fl/lcf;:y W.:1wU h~c" tfC'4;,
(;~u;';( cf, -rl"e A~kU-( /1l'd -1-0 P'UC U//5 I?t'//~ ~ 7 yc-,d' J
tl-F-kr )/J'1/'rt~ '0 -Ih~ j'1',:(d/~ W~S ddYl~ cJn -j-~~T /~ 1-
W/ft, ;1c) ICjtZf'c/ 7-.0 rnr d/{/crf,7_
c-, _ J /M:'cf .s,hH< ~.; ('c .;:;;. r w Ir'" Clr~ ~ ) ItPy S tdeif"tr FrI, j
e?jut'f'hl-to-a+ ~ -10 C::;;/.so t/'0.ux-(' ';-hc tJ/"'l7-t:/'5 q hlY/c pH/('C-
oe~('/lblc +Or ~y hlA1/(y.
y~~
. (j~ tft~
NOTICE OF HEARING FOR THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES;
1. A 6.5% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURF ACE
COVERAGE OF 36.5% INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED 30%;
2. A 3 FOOT DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO
PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SETBACK OF 2 FEET INSTEAD OF THE
REQUIRED 5 FEET FROM THE SIDE LOT LINE;
ALL RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DETACHED GARAGE
AND DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE R1-8UBURBAN
RESIDENTIAL AND SD-SHORELAND DISTRICTS
You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake Planning Commission will hold a hearing at
Prior Lake Fire Station #1, located at 16776 Fish Point Road SE (Southwest of the
intersection of C.R. 21 and Fish Point Road), on: Monday, October 27, 1997, at 6:30
p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible.
APPLICANT: Brian Mattson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle SW
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
SUBJECT SITE: Lot 29, Inguadona Beach, Scott County, Minnesota, also known as
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle SW.
REQUEST: The applicant proposes the construction of a new detached garage
to be located in the rear yard of the subject property. The proposed
construction will result in the following requested variances;
1. A 6.5% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERAGE OF 36.5% INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED
30%;
2. A 3 FOOT DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD SETBACK
VARIANCE TO PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD
SETBACK OF 2 FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 5
FEET;
The Planning Commission will review the proposed construction and requested variance
against the following criteria found in the Zoning Ordinance.
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship with
16200 E!g)27~~WJEY~7fiMat~~R~1JiN~~1)~2ffl~ / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
respect to the property.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique to the
property.
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.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces
substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest.
If you are interested in this issue, you should attend the hearing. 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. The Planning
Commission will accept oral and/or written comments. Oral or written comments should
relate to how the proposed construction and requested variances are or are not consistent
with the above-listed criteria.
Prior Lake Planning Commission
Date Mailed: June 10, 1997
Revision Mailed: June 16, 1997
Notice Mailed for Continued Hearing Date: October 17, 1997.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\9753V APN.DOC97-53PN2.DOC
2
NOTICE OF HEARING FOR THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES;
1. A 24% VARIANCE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERAGE OF 54% INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED 30%;
2. A 4 FOOT DRIVEWAY SIDEYARD SETBACK VARIANCE TO
PERlVIIT A DRIVEWAY SETBACK OF 1 FOOT INSTEAD OF THE
REQUIRED 5 FEET FROM THE SIDE LOT LINE;
ALL RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DETACHED GARAGE
AND DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE RI-SUBURBAN
RESIDENTIAL AND SD-SHORELAND DISTRICTS
You are hereby notified that the Prior Lake Planning Commission will hold a hearing at
Prior Lake Fire Station #1, located at 16776 Fish Point Road SE (Southwest of the
intersection ofC.R. 21 and Fish Point Road), on: Monday, June 23,1997, at 6:30 p.m.
or as soon thereafter as possible.
APPLICAl'lT: Brian Mattson
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle SW
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
SUBJECT SITE: Lot 29, Inguadona Beach, Scott County, Minnesota, also known as
16575 Inguadona Beach Circle SW.
REQUEST: The applicant proposes the construction of a new detached garage
to be located in the rear yard of the subject property. The proposed
construction will result in the following requested variances;
1. A 24% V ARIAt"J"CE TO PERMIT IMPERVIOUS SURF ACE
COVERAGE OF 54% INSTEAD OF THE PERMITTED
30%;
2. A 4 FOOT DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD SETBACK
V ARIANCE TO PERMIT A DRIVEWAY SIDEY ARD
SETBACK OF 1 FOOT INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 5
FEET;
The Planning Commission will review the proposed construction and requested variance
against the following criteria found in the Zoning Ordinance.
16200 Ee~7C\Ie~~~Y.~7~dt9E~RY,1-HlthRlS>&~7S5~+l-~11<4C / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
..."
1. Literal enforcement of the Ordinance would result in undue hardship with
respect to the property.
2. Such unnecessary hardship results because of circumstances unique to the
property.
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.
4. The variance observes the spirit and intent of this Ordinance, produces
substantial justice and is not contrary to the public interest.
If you are interested in this issue, you should attend the hearing. 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. The Planning
Commission will accept oral and/or written comments. Oral or written comments should
relate to how the proposed construction and requested variances are or are not consistent
with the above-listed criteria.
Prior Lake Planning Commission
Date Mailed: June 10, 1997
Revision Mailed: June 16, 1997.
L:\97FILES\97V AR\97-053\9753V APN.DOC9753V APN.DOC
2
SUBJECT LOT:
LOT 29,
INGUADONA BEACH
~
~
- ...=- . =:::::::::--... ~
P. ----~{
!-5l-
r 317'-
J
I
.-"
~-
4
.,.
::6 5
~
"J-
r- Il'I I
2 -! :7 6 ...;, '-
oS
~ -
-
9 ^
I <:..
.....~ ,,-
~~~O .----~
...0'
...-N e: :-..
J-. "-
~
\fJ I ....
~ J ~
['0
~ .J'"
- ^
~
....
~ '':;
~ 2- "C
VI .~t'Jci , J8~
0'" ..
c- 3 ~~
~ ~.
<il ^:). .
::! 42- ~~= /. ~...,,,,
C'" "I. '. ~ . '-.....'4
2 '" ~ . J
<xl ... "
J
!I!
/ 934,4,~
/ :
<0
S89"18'08"E
103.3 plot
-- -105.73 meos. ---
FENCE 1.5'
WESr
I
/
:1941.<
1") t'=-
L_ \..J
Tit's
J ,939-4- -
- ...,~ (Q39.3)
940.jl
~9~.2
x
(936.9)
~
, .
y ZO" MA~LE
: C
,
I
94'.6
(941,9)
1") (~
L _ "-'
941.3 (940.2)
f~ 20
= fEZO"MAP.E .~
/.( .; I ~ PROPOSEO' ·
.e GARAGE N,
943.3 I <) IZ"MAF'I.E;
/ II (944 J ) L _20 1_ IO~O
"' I 943.6 8 ( 7.1) 946.
~I ~. I
\ I 2
:,)
. 1.5
'" ~
,
I
:~
'"
0:
"'0>
So
1/10
01/1
li;~
:-
"
''''
944.1 i<ri
"
dl--.119.71 meos.---
ai' 116.7 plat
946.2,' N88"54'47"W
FENCE 0.5' e:ASr
--
-
<20
x
'-'
'"
o
GARAGE SLAB
EL. 942..01
.XISrING
HOUSE
-..2 ,....
---) \. )
!
I
DESCRIPTICN:
Lot 29, "INGUAOONA BEACH", Scott County, Minnesota. Also showing th<: !.ocation of
the existing improver:i'~- sand proE,JOsed addition, this 16th day of ceo. 1996.
NOI'ES' Benchmark 9.~6 .15 walkout elevation of the existing house.
Net lot acea = 5,607 sq. ft. 946.7 DENOTES EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
x
Net exis ting lot covecage = 28.0 % (9402) DENOTES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION
)" DENOTES PROPOSED DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE
Proposed net lot coverage = 53. 8 "/"
SET GARAGE SLAB AT EL, 940,34
SET TOP OF BLOCK OF GARAGE AT EL. 947.82