Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-12-11 PC Agenda Packeto� rRro� U 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, NW 55372 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, September 12, 2011 City Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. 1. Call Meeting to rater: 2. Approval of Agenda: 3. Consider Approval of August 22# 2611 Meeting Minutes: . Public Hearings: A. (continued)#EP 10-121 Bluffs of Candy Cove. Jason Miller has submitted an application for Variances related to building setback, lot area, and bluff impact on a site consisting of approximately 1.07 acres of land to be subdivided into 3 lots for single family homes. This property is located east of Candy Cove Trall, north of TH 13F B. (continued) #1 P 10-122 Bluffs of Candy Cove. Jason Miller has submitted an application for a combined preliminary and final plat to be known n as The Bluffs of Candy Cove consisting of approximately 1.07 acres of land to be subd vide into 3 lots for single family homes. This property is located east of Candy Cove Trail, north of TH 13. C. #EP 11 - 121 An application for a CUP to allow The Cove Restau rant to continue serving liquor in the C-2 zoning district. The property is located at 15750 Hwy 13 S, at the intersection of Franklin Trail and Hwy 13. D. #EP 11-121 An application for a variance to allow The Cove Restaurant to serve liquor until 2 AM. The property Is located at 15750 Hwy 13 S, at the intersection of Franklin Trail and Hwy 13. . Old Business: None . New Business: None 7. Announcements and Correspondence: . Adjournment: LAI I FILESU I PLANNfNG COMMISSIONU I AGENDAS\050911 A end .do Phon e 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 / mv%v. cit yofpriorlak .coni PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, AUGUST 22, 201 1* call to order: Planning Commission Meeting 9i utes August 8s 2011 Chairman Billington called the August 22, 2011, Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Fos ak, Perez, Howley, and Billington, Planner .Jeff Matzke, and Development Services Assistant PeterAldritt■ A11xx_ t Approval of Agenda: MOTION BY HOWLEY, SECONDED BY ROSZAK To APPI ov ;±t -.HE A �9. ,T 22t 2011 MEETING AGENDA AS PRESENTED,�##: �r:r VOTE: Ages Billington Howley+I PeresyI and I os al . The ni lF cR cried. yri �w F s a 4 j�F } • �Y ~ } 4 # ih S Y •� h } 1�} 4 Sl��lY �hF}kt}4yk�}1 . consider Approval of August 8, 2011 Meetin g""Minutes M h 3! y !F k r h hit * h f xF F ! * # F R htF k h* F Y� h} f 9F F x�y 4} h X! h % 4 F♦ T F 71 h. a r h l�h iY k tF♦ h hF MOTION BY BILLINGT N, SECONDED BY HOWCL Y TO, PR � HE Al. GUST '�o11 MEETING MINUTES AS PRESENTED. YF.�IlhYhtr• hR+h*hr�x"rx t1 FY hl4}h}}h •x3 AFk■1Far P� TE: Ages by Howley, Perez, Billington} and r os a ! The " p carried. 4. Pudic Hearings; A. #EP 11-120: Coker/Christie Varian s. " application for variances from the ipum -1 Low ens!tr Iiential n•n�;traci } k ► a� a rFn �. designated as sy} . land surveyh � Street N E ■Y,r}•}}y. �/wO�..er and;.. F Christie have submitted an �� �r u ii e.d i ,t .wid.th in the Shoreland District and }on site oFoximately 1.5 acres of land to be 'P e properti ��are located at 5994 & 6002 150th B. ##EP 11 -1 �0:'bdb` bhrJChris W . Registered LaQi: rvey. David Coker and Carter Christie have submitted an }ltd t nr: �t i ered Ian survey on site of approximately 1.5 acres of . �+r : �y, 3wt.*# * ■*ai ;� �!�!!h!R fr°a~r+r�lnk t r Ir> larF}jh+x+iY-n,U* esigna�two .� a's rfor two single family home sites. The properties *■ h4 M�'/ Y�yYFhhk t �tkRt.}fts�s*} '02.150" r'''k�t►tr%r/rT hlht � W:M,:46 g &' 6 02.'1 " Stree '� E. Piarthee'-Mx t[ a presented the quest t; .'6onsider both Coker and Christie's application for Variances and from t *6xffli imurn required t widt W in the Shoreland District and -1 Low Density Residential Zoning DitriI- A +,bite of aWateir 1.5 ages of land to be designated ars a registered lanai surer. The properties iW'iftated ado ' % he shores f Prior Lake along Soh Street. The lakeshore property represents what is . n,$.],deredilb be a flag lot. The proposed let sizes would be tract A 41,512 sq. ft. which is the Christie r. lrtg'6' nd tract B at 21,613 . ft. is the Coker property, The minimum lot size for the R-1 zoning distridt:`W 15,000 and both properties will meet this requirement. In addition, both properties will be within4 he 30 percent impervious surface ordinance requirement. The lot width of the properties at their current state is not changing; however because both lots do not currently meet the minimum lot widths they require approval of lot width variances prior to approval of a registered land survey. Generally a registered land survey can be handled administratively but since the legal description is already very lengthy and difficult to decipher, the Counter Auditor's Office felt that it would be wise to alter the legal descriptions than to just add onto the already long legal descriptions. The new properties would be known as Tract A of a Registered Land Survey for the Christie property and Tract B of a Registered Land Survey for the Coker Property. LAI 11 ILLS\I I PLANNINGi I 10NMI 1MINUTE IM 221 Ldoc Planning Commission Meeting Minutes July 11, 2011 Questions from the Commissioners: Ione A MOTION WAS TRADE BY BILLINGTON AND SECONDED BY H WLEY TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. G. TE: Ares by Billington, Perez, Howley, and Fosak. The motion carried The Public Hearing began at :12 p.m. Comments from the Public: � }"this land 0'.`WnsureC arter Cl�rlstle gg2 1 50t' fit# S, stated tl�e proposal pu�.:Aomeone that there would be some green space in front of nay house i the Co .+.� r e1s.4:Wr ,, build farther back on the lot. The variance request was the county's,r. nest to clean up the Ieg fNA,',�. riptions. hY }Yt YL �� 1 w. �` rr+#tri}fi#T �/axf Elizabeth lol�en fit. S# asked If heUW st*,o clea. property+�rtpions is that 1hat I a hearing? ri ? �tsY,Yxk�'s#hrir'.+�A�� k _ y } ■Y *w���k r rtFx. '•xr'a. **i� r r x**F*iYyk aF{f�l��l�I �Y F I ii Planner Matzke responded Carter Christie,J-Isr41e_ eking to puroh i44, , g sq. ft. form his neighbor se that he adds more land to his property. H ��;: ating a new pa �4 r new housing unit; it is just to N rha� #}=F }Fit r } h }l7 a I � JI k 1i �h add more Ird to his property. dine he has �h��}g*and ornpliita.�al description the county "Al wanted to take this oportunitr to here the leg`'42 del*.:e-1ene eth`V'�ri it would have another long paragraph added to it for the new land Elizabeth McLean state �`A4 ��•�t a house on t '■ `�� � e� anoth *' x�nous on the street and there is a sYri�xfiw■fix"■xh]r +` I little blue house in the mi die. is t .:,riddle housep rt of this land sale? saFsxa F*R11} ��4%h xr}x� ��4 . whds3}ssi xiiasa}s a ■�lyhlFx Y�■ }If {.� f #YT aµ+;a}ssa+Y xh*rr"� Dare Coker 5994 1 � t� ;*F . st(4. the middle prop, -i'is not part of ghat we are doing here= Elizabeth 111 :; .d i s t hii� .; g g thine or just land transfer? s'r'•e{ ' i � t'ays'rra>a+Fsl; kx Plnner�=�itke res oris= there*��.: o new coning happening or no never hones being built, They ■ p *��xR are b 1Jy taking Dare +-0•� 's ba l �. ;, yea and transferring it to Carter Christie's property. M Tl N,S MADE Y �`tV I NGT AND SECONDED P I SAZK T KEEP OPER THE PUBLIC HE: G. �..: ;aA¢Fr-■ } w+#Fssl OTE; Ares by Pill , Flo*jby, Perez and Fos ak. The motion carried. The public hearing was''��Oged at 6:23 p.m. . Commissioner Comments and Questions: Billington stated I don't see any reason to not support the Variance request, so I will be supporting this and the Registered Land Survey. Howley stated I agree with the Variance requests. It makes sense to get the existing properties more in conformance so that they can do the existing land surrey. I do have a question on the Registered Land Burger, I was wondering if there could be a fourth condition we could add that would state Tract LAI Hill 5111 PLANNING CO11 MI I NAI 1MI UTESVM1 0 21 Ldoc 2 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes July 11, 2011 need to comply with the current impervious surface regulations if someone were to want to put up a bigger house in the future? Matzke e responded it isn't necessarily needed to be added because at the time we would receive a building permit application and they would have to comply with the current impervious surface ordinance. Howley asked without that condition attached when none of us are around and someone does ask for a variance it might he hard to remember. Planner Matzke responded it may be challenging to attach such a sp , Ific like that, to a I��1kFX } Y property because it will stay with the property and if the ordinances . � : ` � don the road that certain condition is stuck with that property. Howley stated I will be supporting the Registered Land Sur\i I os ak I will be supporting both variances and the Ian Perez stated I agree with the identified Findings of rct supporting the items. A MOTION WAS MADE BY H WLEY ND-; REQUESTED ESTED 6 FOOT VARIANCE FI I1 `¥ ; SH I ELAND DISTRICT. 3 VOTE: Ayes by Howley, Perez, Billington, an A MOTION WAS MADE B REQUESTED g FOOT ± SH I ELAND DISTI c:,. VOTE. Ares bar Howle,b° A MOTION ��tT-MAD. PP AL-oF7- fir' f i MOTE:A, V§ by HowieF ,` 1, old" - Ojuness: A. Non 2. }Ytttrya k r S;ttR+ New Buse■ ■�#■ ■exs A. Mone ECONDED BY B11 't-k-WiNIMUM REQ on, and loa . m issioner a will too he TON TO APPROVE THE �LOT WIDTH IN THE Y BILL] Pj GTO N TO APPROVE THE UM REQUIRED UIRED LOT WIDTH IN THE :die motion carried. i AND""$ � .-O D BY ROSZAK TO RECOMMEND THE HD S RV9Y AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. n, and Iosal. The motion carried. 3. Announcements and correspondence: A. Reminder about the September 24th workshop in Elko New Market Billington asked are there any meetings in September' Planner Matzke responded yes It looks like you will have both your meetings in September. The public hearing from the August Stn meeting which the Planning Commission kept open, concerning the Bluffs of Candy cove project will be on the September 12'hmeeting and on the September 26th meeting thea LAI I FIt,ESll 1 PLANNING C MMISSI 11 I MINUTES\MN08221 Ldog 3 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes July 11, 2011 may be a consideration for ar Preliminary Plat and PUD amendment ent and possibly another Preliminary Plat as well fortat meeting. MOTION TO ADJOIN BY HOWLEYSECOND BY ROSZAK TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. VOTE: Ages by Howley, Perez} Billington, and Roszak. The motion carried. . Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 6:28 p.m. PeterAldritt} Development Services Assistant LAI I F1LE UI PLANNING COMMIS SION\I1 N4fNUrTE IM 0 221Ldo AGENDA ITEM. 4A SUBJECT: CONSIDER VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALL' FOR THE SUBDIVISION of A PROPERTY TY AND CONSTRUCTION of STRUCUT Bs WITHIN THE -1 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) TIAL ZONING DISTRICT SITE P1Dss 25-027-023-02 25-027-024-03 26-027-025-0 PREPARED AF ED B` . JEFF l'IIIAT F E, PLANNER PUBLIC HEARING: X YES No -NIA DATE: SEPTEMBER 12, 201 INTRODUCTION Jason Filler is requesting Variances to construct residential home lets on property located along Candy Cove on Prier Lake at the intersection of Candy Cove Trail and State Highway 13. For a proposed development to be known as The Bluffs of Candy Cove, the developer requests the following Variances: Lots 1, 2, A variance to allow a structure to be located in the bluff impact zone. (section 104.803) A 5 foot variance from the required minimum 5 foot drivevVay side yard setback Section 107.205 (1)) Lot 1 A 25 foot variance from the minimum 25 foot front hard setback required in the - Zoning Use District (section 1102.405 (3)). Lot A 32 foot variance from the minimum foot lake setback required in the Shorela rd District (section 1104.308. 2. • A 10 foot variance from the minimum 10 foot side yard setback required in the R -1 g Use District Section 1104.405 (3)). Lot 3 • A 20 foot variance from the minimum 25 foot front yard setback required in the - Zoning Use District Section 1102.405 (3)). • A 45 foot variance from the minimum 75 foot lake setback required in the Shoreland District (Section 1104.308.(2)). • A 4,923 square foot variance from the required minimum lot area for a riparian residential lot on a General Development Lake within the Sh r land District (section 4.302 3. Ph ne 952.447.9800 F,%,x 952.447.4245 / Ni,%Nr%.iF. ityofpriorta . oiii BACKGROUND The site is zoned -1 (Lover Density Residential) and SD Shoreland Overlay District), and is guided I - LD (Urban an Lover Density Residential) on the 2039 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The land i currently vacant with steep slopes throughout ranging in elevation from 984 IVISL to 904 MSL. The property was originally platted in 1921 as Lots 32, 33# 34, 35, & 36 of the plat, Candy Cove Park. In 1960 the State of Minnesota acquired a portion of the lots for the development of the State Highway 13 right -of -gray and Coady Cove Trail was realigned to intersect Highway 13. The City of Prior Lake maintains ownership f the former Candy Cove Trail platted right--of-way via a parcel of land (PID 25- 936-075-0) by which this proposed development site and the developed adjacent residential properties located at 5572 and 5584 Candy Cove Trail are accessed. On August 8, 2011 the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the proposed plat. At the meeting some local residents voiced concerns relating to the removal of a portion of the hill near the intersection of Candor Cove Trail and Hwy 13 which provides an element of a sound buffer to the Candy Cove Trail neighborhood. After discussion of the project, the Planning Commission chose to continue the public hearing and discussion to the September 12, 2011 meeting to allow the applicant additional time to respond to City Staff engineering comments related to grading and storm water designs= DIRMISSION The applicant is proposing to plat the property into 3 buildable residential lots. Lot 1 is 23,360 square feet, Lot 2 is 15,159 square feet, and Lot 3 is 10,077 square feet. In order to gain access to the site the applicant proposes a single, 10% grade, common drive from Candy Cove Trail to the 3 lots. Retaining gall systems are needed to level the access driveway area and building pad sites while minimizing ing the impact to the steep, bluff slopes. The impervious surface proposed is identified for Lot 1 as 4,515 sal. ft (19.3% of the total lot area), for Lot 2 as 4,032 (26.6%), and for Lot 3 as 2,519 sq. ft. (25.0%). The property was once platted in 1921 under the Plat of Candy Cove Park as Lots 33, 33, 34, 35, & 36= The property currently involves 3 PIN 25-027-023--0, 25-927-024-61 5-027-025-0 of which all are under common ownership. According to MN Statute 394.36 c "In a group of two or more contiguous lots of record under common ownership, an individual lot must be considered as a separate parcel of land for the purpose of development, if it meets the following requirements: (1) the lot must be at least 66 percent of the dimensional standard for lot width and lot size for the shoreland classification consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 6120; (2) the lot must be connected to a public sever, if available, or must be suitable for the installation of a Type I sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, and local government controls, (3) impervious surface coverage must not exceed 25 percent of each lot; and (4) development of the lot must be consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan. All three lots meet these requirements as currently proposed. The following details further evaluate each variance request: Bluff Impact Zone A bluff impact zone variance is requested for all 3 proposed lots. A lame majority r of the site in elevation from the toe of the bluff to the front property lines lie within the bluff impact zone. A variance for the bluff impact zone is necessary to allover any building pads on the 3 proposed lots. The applicant proposes retaining walls on the property to reduce the amount of grading impacts to the steep bluffs slopes; Also, the applicant has submitted a geotechnical report complete with soil borings and an engineer's recommendations for footing designs, desired materials for subg rde and backfill compaction, etc. According to Ordinance 1104.305 3 "The owner of the properly shall submit ars as - built survey and post -construction report completed by a professional engloneerR registered by the State of Minnesota that the final grading of the site was completed in compliance with an approved grading Plan and that the recommendations contained in the engineer's report have been adhered to." Drive Variance Lot 1 1 A driveway variance is requested for all 3 proposed lots. The driveway variance is necessary to allow for the proposed shared access driveway which would cross private property lines. The individual driveways leading from the shared access driveway to each garage are proposed to meet the 5 foot minimum side yard driveway setback requirement. The developer will create a joint access private agreement for the proposed 3 properties for maintenance of the access drive. Front Yard Variance (Lot ) To achieve a moderate grade for the access driveway a -12 high foot retaining wall system is necessary to retain the nearby hillside. This retaining wall is located within the city -owned parcel and Lot 1. The variance request is necessary to allow for the proposed retaining gall passing through the minimum required 25 foot front card setback for Lot 1. Front Yard Variance (Lot 31 A 20 foot front yard variance from the required minimum 25 foot setback is requested for Lot 3. The building pad for Lot 3 is proposed to be setback 5 feet from the front property line Highway 13). The variance is necessary to allow the construction of the proposed building pad area for Lot 3. Lake Setback Variance, Lot 2, 3 A 45 foot lake setback variance is requested for Lot 3. The proposed building pad is located 30 feet from the ordinary High Water Elevation (goo elevation) of Prior Lake. The required minimum lake setback is 75 feet, The variance is necessary to allow the construction of the proposed building pad area for Lot 3; In addition, a 32 foot lake setback variance is required for the proposed -14 foot high retaining wall system in the rear yard of Lot 2. The placement of this proposed gall will reduce the area of impact to the bluff slope in the rear yard of Lot 2 and on adjacent Lot 1. Side Yard Setback, Variance (Lot 2) A 5 foot side yard setback variance is proposed for the proposed 6-14 foot high retaining wall near the western property of Lot 2. The placement of this proposed wail will reduce the area of impact to the bluff slope in the rear yard of Lot 2 and adjacent Lot 1. Lot Area Variance (Lot 3) 4$923 square foot variance is requested for the creation of Lot 3. The minimum lot size required by the Zoning ordinance for a riparian lot on a General Development lake such as frier Lake is 15,000 square feet. The variance is necessary to allow for the creation of Lot 3. The area for Lot 3 (10$ 077 square feet) is at least 6 of the dimensional standard for lot width and therefore, does meet the lot area requirement for a buildable lot of record according to MN Statute 394.36 (c). ANALYSIS SIS 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: 1There are practical difficulties in complying with the strict terms of the ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a Variance, means the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The property consists of five undeveloped riparian lots in the "R-1" Single Family Residential Zoning District. The lots were platted in 1921. The buildable area of each let, along with the topography presents challenges to developing the property and constructing a reasonable size single family dwelling that is consistent with the size of dwellings in the surrounding neighborhood. The lots remain in common ownership which has allowed the applicant an opportunity to reconfigure the available land area and apply to subdivide the property into three lots. The exceptional topography and shape of the property are unique to the property. The vehicular access point to the property is limited to an approximately 50 foot wide strip of land at the southwest corner of the property. In order to allow for a safe and reasonable access to the property a bluff impact zone variance for all proposed lots, driveway setback variance for the proposed lots, and front yard setback variance for Lot 3 appear necessary to allow the proposed shared access driveway and retaining walls to be constructed. In addition, a bluff impact zone variance is necessary for construction of any building pads areas on the property. (2) The granting of the Variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City Subdivision ision and Zoning ordinances and the Comprehensive Plan. The granting of the bluff impact zone variance for all lots} driveway setback variance for all lots, and front yard setback variance for Lot 3 is in harmony with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. The property is designated for low density residential development under the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance and the granting of this variance will achieve the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance to "promote the most appropriate and osierdevelopmentthe residential, business, industrial, public land, n public areas. , (3) The granting of the Variance is necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property involved. In order to allow for a safe and secure access to the property and a reasonable amount of square footage for a modern home, the granting of the variances appear necessary. These variances are necessary to create a reasonable building pad area for the lots and driveways to access thea safely. (4) The practical difficulty is due to circumstances unique to the property not resulting from actions of the owners of the property and is not a mere convenience to the property owner and applicant. The Minnesota Department of Transportation acquired property for the construction of improvements to Highway 13. In doing so access to the property from the area now occupied by Highway 13 was eliminated and the amount of the available land for reconfiguring the existing lots compromised. The acquisition of right-of-way for Highway 13 created a situation that meets the required hardship criteria to support some, but not all of the requested variances. The property was originally planted into five lots} all of which are contiguous and in common ownership. The minimum lot size for a single family lot in the Shoreland District is 15,000 square feet. Pursuant to MN Statute 394.36 Subd. 5c the five lots can be combined into three individual lots for development. Due to the steep topography and shape of the available land it is not possible to reconfigure the original Matted lots into residential properties which meet the setback requirements from the bluff impact zone setback, driveway setback requirements, lake setback for Lot 2 and 3, and the front yard setback requirement for t=ot 1 and 3 without granting variances. The hardship basis for the proposed variances is due in part to the acquisition of right- of-way for Highway 13 which is circumstances unique to this property. The recommended variances are necessary to allover for the construction of safe and reasonable access to the property. (5) The granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or e detrimental to the health and safety of the public welfare. The granting of the bluff impact zone variance for all three lots, driveway setback variance for all three lots, Lot 3 minimum area variance, lake setback variances for Lot 2 and 3, and front yard setback variance for Lot 3 will not impact the character and development of the local neighborhood. Many of the lots along the southern shores of Candy Core are also irregularly shaped with existing nonconforming front }yard setbacks and bluff impact zone encroachments. The geotechnical report identifies stable soils within the area for structures to be constructed on the steep slopes. (6) The granting of the Variance will not result in allowing any use of the property that is not errrrltted in the coning district where the subject property is located. The proposed uses of the property are single-family residential dwellings which are a permitted use within the l -I (Low Density Residential) Zoning District. (7) The granting of the Variance is necessary to alleviate an inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The current proposal does not involve any proposed solar energy systems. CONCLUSION Due to the exceptional topography and shape of the property and in order to allow for a safe and secure access and a reasonable mount of square footage for a modern home, the strict application of the following variances appear to create a practical difficulty for the owner of the property to develop 3 residential home lots on the property: Lots 1 • A variance to allow a structure to be located in the bluff impact zone. (Section 1104.303) • A 5 fool variance from the required minimum 5 fool driveway side yard setback Section 107.205 (1)) Lot I •A 25 fool variance from the minimum 25 foot front yard setback required in the R-1 Zoning Use District (section 1102.405 (3)). Lot A 32 foot variance from the minimum u 5 foot lake setback required in the Shor lan District (Section 1104.308. 2. •A 10 fool variance from the minimum 10 foot side yard setback required in the Zoning Use District (section 1104.405 3• Lot • A 20 fool variance from the minimum 25 foot front yard setback required in the f - Zoni g Use District (Section 1102.405 (3)). • A 45 fool variance from the minimum 5 fool lake setback required in the Shorelan District (Section 1104.308. 2. • A 4#923 square fool variance from the required minimum lot area for a riparian residential lot on a General Development r ent Dake within the Shoreland District (Section 1104.302 3i City staff acknowledges rledges that the project site is challenging in regards to topography for the design of building pads areas and an access drier. City Staff has had many discussions with the developer, and major plan changes have been made to reduce bluff impacts, number of variance requests, and grading impacts throughout the site. The developer has attempted to reach an agreement with the property owner at 5584 Candor Cove to grade on the adjacent property in order to reduce retaining gall heights rear the shared property line. These retaining walls are needed for the installation of the proposed access drive to the properties. In the instance an agreement cannot be reached between the developer and neighboring property owner, the developer has prepared ars alternative grading pian design which would not require grading on the adjacent property. In either proposed grading plan} to achieve the driveway r access to the site, a portion of the hill on the City -owned parcel near the intersection of Candy Cove Trail and Hwy 13 is being proposed for removal including a retaining gall which was installed on City property gears ago by the adjacent property owner. A new retaining gall system is proposed to be installed within the City -owned parcel with coniferous trees to be placed for screening and buffering purposes. While the developer has made substantial changes to the original design of the project, City Staff believes there remain additional changes which may change the overall grading and storm grater of the site and therefore affect the proposed variance requests. These additional engineering changes are identified in the attached engineering memorandum dated September 7, 2011. The City Staff recommends the applicant revise the development plans to address the comments in the engineering memorandum. After City Staff reviews the reprised plans, vire recommend the Planning Commission once again review the plat and variance requests at a future meeting for possible approvals and recommendations to City Council. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve any variance the Planning Commission deems appropriate in these circumstances. 2. Table or continue discussion of the item for specific purpose. 3. Deng any variance because the Planning Commission finds a lack of demonstrated practical difficulties under the zoning code criteria. RECOMME s CTI N The recommendations by staff require the following motions: 1. A motion and second to table the discussion of the variance requests until the applicant has the opportunity to revise the development plans. ATTACHMENTS `l. Location neap 2.- Development Plans 3. Engineering Dept. Memorandum dated 9-7--11 . Community Development Dept. memorandum dated 9-7-11 r-:,-:��.:� ."::.: kl— , � J--�, - -:-�� —,-� �.,7 �"-.�7.. � , -, -", "' , �t :.- - 7�­ � �-,'- -, ,,� --, ��:,-�'!�ff-��-' �� !:5:-�,T '��F,�.��-'-',.�.-�-'e'.--..- ..., ��'-.�O__ p I .1i , - I - .: � - .. - AM.... 1� P, -3,%,,--,T ... .. �, - - � . '. ��.. � ., "I-- � . I— 1-1 �' ��.. �7 � . .� q N, L 0M--'v-,a, - -.6 ..... "-Z�- -- �- -, . m r-, .. , 7 M I. rnf, � �,7 .� ? V - I Rig-, ... . � r� �-b . ,- ---,—.% .,w . � �-: , �Z,'Ir er I � I M.1 t" -�-.,., . ;-) J:�, ��;-,;, I " - - �-7. ,�� ----'T',- , -- -z-� ---f , _� . =,-. &� - -I - .", , -,- 'r r"', : . .� _..,.:, %�- 3 , ,- - I W - , v, - , , - -, Vz"�!:V. ." - ...- � ..—.., �..'�. . , --; �f-...:.-? --::� -, ' �, A;-�. '�I.-�,:, . . , , -, 4&-- - �-i, 2 ... ... — - 2 - .': r.. ",:--� , _ . I , . -.,..� F - -, .. �:-�j :1 , 9�-�* .; f. ---�-'-� ,-7�---j,�6--i -'. - 7 .... ;,. 4n, � .'- -:-� ; '... .. . --t- 7 - -W-iA2 3 ". �A - , �,�---i--:-" - :.--.: . .:-. - 1-7 ,- W-- r �1 "Y"'.;� I f.;, IR , �) - %,-. 1-6 -! ,J-V-k��� --j N.. ji ; J--'�-:%---'.;'%."-d �--- ,-) I ei� � . : ..- .71�. , ��V,-"�: �?.:y - . e. s .: -�--,. .-N: �-� f--&-', -, - .e:-.,� I --- ) - Ii -1- - . y�, ig *.- : .11 F:,--�- �Q-f - - ... - , ... - .,.� , f� --,K� . � ---r -i-, � , - M V. �� _ , ft .:- , - - .. �. .. -�,--N2- , �%.-4 � - ., 4 r" -.11. , - 'j_ ..._,.., -.. % , -,.e;.. . ,,--r-, . � - -,- -� .k -! � ...:-. .. �, �v . . I 1 77,�. , Ar -�' -- - -- , k"', '- :.- -L�-' . �. rm! " � , -.', - , , 0- j 't., . �:.- - - /" -6:.; .." . t. ,.�. �..,. 0 a . -r �,-Alq . I ... . .11 . " - �r k , ... - - 'M%6"'oX 1�0,�.,�--'-'--IIM -�-�,�� �- , . ,�,�; -_y I I.. I . m q� �� �r�`,-�r?l ", �� I - %. ' ...... ;;�.�- W- , . "�K.�'�,','.: . . . � -e- - - % - - ff,�, . � , .. -i,%��,'---�.-. -� ;. - . .5 -'��.�, - � - ,��,- � �;. ., � . �:l E-,-�, " . . ,:�:.-, j . . � . .- - �- I ... I . ... - ;;� C-q*n,gl _41� - ., � - '.. . I 1 �:%. P- "Nu . 'A"PI, ..z -- " , . ;��. ... - 5T . I r.� ': - I IV . , I ? '..:%��;�,.�%%.v....vy.�..�l'.�--.- t -�� @ ... I . . . . . ,.� - _ ,,,,, %, � -, M 5 - 3 -;�. t .. ,n - _Iv. -,,� I'. --w A! i, a .� -, - - � %-q-.... . . . . . . . . � - -'�- .. . - � . .. -:- k. � ,.-- A�--opy'�w-�� -4 , ;,-, ., . .. .'�,. ��..' , .,'� �, ;� , - .,.-;;�,-..... -, . . . j 01. 7, .. '--- , - '. . , . - ,:_ . .. .1i - , - J�.4 ; .. �—. .� , ..\ . ; 4 - t14 '� r. -�- " - .�. -- r. ,f, ,%��,-,,,-%..-A.L;��:��l-,�j�i�,..,-.;N."�� -.- - N� A : ? 7....6 -��.. "." %,..- - - ... - :. ,. , r. .;. , . .. K. . %�; W,41� ' .4.� "' g ',�, -'------.- � . : .. -� .. 6� ., 6. . -.-. . L�: � aiii fi--gf,,�,-4:;j- , -.,�-..- A.. �._ .% - M- . - . K :. � �m v "S4 -1, 2176� - - .. : -�'- , A .-, .. 11, .. I- , I -��, - � % , R'... -..? .6. � . a% '.., - ".ZP-- %N I % - -'T- !Loz-:"M�;, -�'--L�.�. .... 3 , -,�! - Sk . a ��5 -ft '.. � �:0�2��,, ..'. - .: �-, , �- L7 „y x ❑ ri Z LU uA w Ln LU v¢ LL h p w it o ry (�L� V Qo Ll.t � o C)r% uj o � C11zwur o� m ❑ z u � LU CL no .Qo �� 2w o� oV70 4 youl F— a N Os5 QJ c! LU ,�-X � ¢ E o - ¢ fi Z Lu o W �r ZCL CL uj W 2 �— LL CU N�❑wX� �c u 1••1 (1j V d W �J h 51 Q [� J V Ci W •C C ,-, z W LQI. w w T �] z a5w D ra�,�.° �z���c Qu o W W h '-1Q Z °' {> U J O O C!i Q ^i e7 0lu uj z p et CY LU h-i O.' r'•" C� Q i"'i a? L!7 Q LI7 N 4 !-• Q Lu {Y 0 G LL k'- >- 4 uj 0 Q- (n uJ Q �"" h H of 4 n W LL. Y] [!� h O Z 2 Q J ai o, ni ¢ A d o Ln Ln e D 0 4� O b x z (D CL g F-' UD LU a �¢Cc x ��° J woa LLJivy, N C C-14 .i Nmv�nnao a+ tL �'�e c �oQ.�ry oa Z-000 �ui�uj } to � �� Ln wmo �r Z J W -4 U Q w� .e M Iz V L1 x h- w V Q y V) o O w E]_-VI-4U7v ca �•o0L NLLi0 O` LU C� rIn LU¢Qdwz" n U) �w� a i Q: o Vwa°: x 0 z O h - o of w W 0'0 Q h V Q 1- �oce � G CL x m 6 a n n . ❑nnv ru't� � -zcw �/JaJs; S:ONV:t:I • ;<.!s •i:Lt� } - h 3, e v [i 1^ fnj wI wAla �J W '�....JiI • y '•M' 1 .. F' �- 9 ?, r •ii 't'. ��'r l,F.J�', 4r U r� vi.�• 4 f :..7,',7h4 TMLI:ITJM -r 5 .'..?••z ¢ t `x`�; �I 471t-^�- •H1 'b• •�, �j •J � ✓ 'J ii. Q F-- CC s,LU s,<`,.tt•L e':;^'3: a RMv,} :I Mixuu� 1Xwa f',rr 5�vIMS:Norr ��?eir� rr �i nyK O NZU F+'•i 4 �fs <� r� - 3...., p. XN, �� �� J �'�.N �'J J � _e6ti,•s .7 �' Jr J ,r Q O1 N ]� W Q � A ;d1 S! s u'iyq�tirM W do u; a _ r cn Lu w !>` :zit°.F a �A) u b3J�4N `Y4p v :.-df •* a. a L% Q Q "Fr t;r <<:. ` t•�L `a �L ul of timvaa v �,, " =: U z z V �L� <,'�� 4 - a�_ Y •. w h O_ O w ?, ::i'`r x; s', ^''%z � • 'rttL ary s �''•�� r it Sn 3uaKI[a ti a ,� Ll1 w O r::si:ua;:.,,.<z:� <<t T " '. �. " • L..'�I }� r •'` u vw rylfhr N �y w ro LLL a�t�KR+ t © d - :•t IA r� 7 �..�:j y W k S S �+: •:<S<s;: ?`t:,. i�23' lifi?. �Nvw x s w 3 '+ �'� 9 v. r �/ a w ❑ O it`i u a1 z' Z LE LU 'rvI Lrw�J ; •N Y �1✓ •11I7 Niy� 0 z Y49 W Q r — 3�: L V ti 1 4x. bran r G I� � � r� • w ti 4; ..x� � 4 1~ wf .: 8 J - Kx Cf � �'-, �,:::�..t,.,�,., �..:.ti 1 r"�"'s1 � ,�r �. �� �. �� I n LrL�A �• w j -JAY 7 r +1 r �. _ Jn 1 U .fJ'r]lr3 r '..,5�� �,. J .•L Ii IV S � d •7, n T— a ¢ �i- .� r V i•'•y ',.s„ "e to y` J. Z 'f Cs ..i7 '<`�Ui11 we:1,Fs M r � yr .py33 .,rv(u1S , ��'. •AA111d/ <�l i5 arr[.l :woz ;:�:� iii=`�% `F?rz•,j f*+. s aM d r,ri �' 5ry'' S,,Y - �-. � O ['rS � WiMdSON:� �L;: c�. ��� 6 �1I'I�nr J L} L ✓'".-, MWM G1 V Q 1;=fes ;'�;'••.• 'tliJd rrl I 44 E W :'• app L1 ULM N �� i �;.: U7.v h Fri - � �I Jhtl LU r��� .:'.. a..... k' ;rZ<, yj i ."/ �kW �� 'rF,t; •xy LJS'• ,.4•;. s1- d117 '�i 'r > zo w w ar� r� i, .xs•: ':r:l-}'>. :.z,:`s�FN lNa'y`- d e7 `� •"a �` � ¢ V a 2 w Y! �y� LWti.i z: 1'} ix ,-,,. . f' ,:� SS lM1 + R S NIS N w O Cy J rp aa,. (]�"fi L� _ naveTZ,V t�&i s�� •ia y 1rry � +,�-;;::tx<' �; ����� w � � �4usFccFaa ��y. Q �n C7 t� A f'"'"� ARWS'l •:lA tl d x�rx^ A7 mm C1 W 3 dIu i11 � ;� � `� g �� ❑ �J �^>K^"'� � � `��� � y `•, us �„ � � 2 � T z ¢ Q ''• . �'���'3 y. "yyJi SMMYH 3+W , J� ❑ tG Q ru N L= 1- d> z d © Z .�_�� p� V Q Ili V Y• R ' i ' I ��'•IR1�. M L1. .« vc. ... vy G •Y t h f X .z r1 W. a L' T •Ct i (t — A' '�l<E-:i �::l:� ii'L._``,. ..nn .E l � '✓�,� (. �'.'.h ,�� � rr q ,y O �"•• 'Z i•17Y;j iy T ,X W u y! WO �� r r ■ / f ..l .h-.���v q; i va � � s �5,� � {I` i�' s£ '` " t � It � F^' w rr1 h...{ ss �, +`"--r i?l vlI���,. •y7(I £ ",IAr{:!C �I >.,�.s''P r 04 H � 3 N p.l ^u w '�s� r yr r c l rl at r �7NHRe i w u V1 LU W r•�' i 4 1 4 ti �s3n w t//_-�'y _ N a• 0.' w 2 Z W w `z Zt iii i` o i a 1' av 2 V V a Q ., r v u 1 ,�. •Ma I s.ss G s 0 p f �� , — HIS.r. ar LL. V7 �,,,. ]Ryyu _ >� 4 R� FI"., s t E i iS 4� MaJ7LA. �7`r✓� >I O Q N .••t fI] Y•F'S p, 4'" ti!� aJ I3 :,5� _ £ ; i r s r -_ t t >T, 9, V ri�J J1 L V ❑ w U7 cr !� �' r; �,%--� {-.: p�.;\;•�x `,',f �:'' :. .. "4' a LST. �... � a � � � �--{.c G� %\ a '•. p; ':3: r:'t;�:f.xk: ,ea_ (':.. .;• iSi NlY - .1r `�`j N LLt "M•N fiJQ[N - '� . j.,,< s�: err <i:•� �� J''} lYN.. .AiA � w ❑ LL' � .� A <as �, r7 coon mw d Q llrl k�s,� t l�6 w t: ;�c� vnsve� ?;I�»�--^rte=• �7 �,••, z C u +� ti N W1 z N W ✓w' � ?�`. . :.irk - . � 4 :r. rr v' •1 A jJj,,r � J �r O Q Q 4 F e a' w �r r u C & D 1� � Q �. T w ..�x 4 ti ° zb� ` �'t • yq +';' 4, `"�� ��w iy ��i�z}:':� � C+ �'=ii:=.'•. '.•+a!'�-.-•� C 1 >�� <N w w '.3 s :7 11V{!�Ud <'a'^ .F..gyi`' L, w 2 � �, '-' CV i•;€�-�. antis A0Y ^i •U'{,�wr•� ^ >� 5,.�-::: • ..i �..: z:; <. �,. N � � � —C U] Q U vm r y vloriud i'i Tle!, -•7d c. n 1•' a I iL 're t r �IYS U)P46 r,1A• N � Y, � .!• UGS'y.• Y..z. r:4'� `'::�:', 'i :4,�1.;....<. w u 'p ul Ja;� wv ��irdl:r'=�_��� Yi<S^; `;v:::•i<�r v� n� .,. . � :r� w �"' � 'tlitl Or++"IOon+n w � I�w• �V]:°�ti:, yi �'ri r;S<: :+Z;'•i=;c-� �c •�O ��1,.-.�' •l� ✓r . S I n ys, w S X a Y j�'•9. 1` a � :: �y 117+' m m Ln MLn Yz] � rM% uj Ln s•••1 Y h CY ,.i OO Q I ��MOj� V :4 C. z• GS .�•i b• LL! ©Lo 7- u .. u �2wli ❑ (] w .-. � � � LU. 4] r•s d x ❑ H z O 14 U LL t-u w s it � l41 W 4 iIXm LU q Y S y 2 xL�L•�' iyU�]j og t' q [diW W �Cy7W RW.+ PG K G WV, d2 4+ �• S• 0W GJ olUiA IoI�-^-• N W d L4w ZZ VIn O O�K N pS �LL p O A p O' T❑4C}' 0. 2' N 4' J Q `�' oo w v a J cc L4) VI a a❑~ V U V7 d a N 6 } y V V m L7 V U F V Vl Vl N 7 V ❑ g n Q m 57t { r. U V aJ V L7 N W is V 1n 4 U x y W S a /� jjI � 7 � � � 7 ❑ Fi m N � m rl- CA LU Oj 1 w N 0. »aVS 314a 0NooJOUP7S :1340w u5p•yM LiZDa-O%M-VS1u6ISaaZZ'200-:�l;—dnlanaC da7ra 021QM £Zz0177/VT.7Ls=Coildl,'8 :31U wd or-lzo:t rrozlrl6 -'BIV0101d N p L i V i E LU N c Lu uj L iL o U_ �u n r U Eu >- i 0 Z � U Q �l LL II LL z 11 'I 3 E� cl� m rr id f a w rr E a LU -LU _ 0 1� Mw 0 x� I 0 �ti �, -SIN l w a ILL Iio �•. z� .�� I Lr) gg3A.A . / NaNN j! 1"40 x �— i \0� D ■///fJ toCL g +"'' LU t/■' � ,sit � ■ Y ! � �u �'^ � I [] MvCUj � r4 co Jill LU LL O J • Q • 1 ter LLi 110�71 11 00 > �2 \ mXCJ� q. aF� O$ p �.W Is 10 171, LU oi� .r Vp' U C J Ln � � }j � Gj • D .a ��b � � N O+' •8 �. / AL1 � �(• , • a , I p 4 a O e4 Nom u N �� �.I •. N A }' co D 7 V ' p m J. CID O L �{ J 4. S X44 co L/ 4 �j I � � m Wwm r`or�nQ' b' yD WWW S m M I I LU I, � I J o_ r i x U go [4 ua d O a alnvi-Do *,I;cOL4 u p'+u1d�LZZaO-Qls7a3V51u6��aILZiQA �1�uawdo�a��Q �a�aMa�l�lM 4CZZOk7Z41MS1D.9rOYdl"S :;Ili Nd 9VZO:Z rrOZ/YI6 31vo tole LU / m U z CL d i I 1-^ Z Li! CL ro Z LU Z lA.l z L J U x Nr p N N N pLU ,•-i a U Lu �- Z M Q U U LL �- o � LL w t7 dam. J 2 m C'W O 2 O � H i� i Nw o oa v a� N 06 � M � V �.T luw w ^-, O7 .i V747.10 :1300W u�A'd6 "Lt�00-�1 aay5lu81�aC11L2ZD� 71auo[udalanap �a�eMa71VM rz,-Ok,;Mm1S O3CaYA-s :;IH wzp:P5:8 ICdL/L/b '3J.tlA I w n n U�ZLU LU_< �� U1 Q Q X a LU oa f or a fuio C%" n BUJ ca2�Aul z° ~a �Q ! �O=U��m cn �il i Y W G ALU ztieo �Q 11.1 Vim W d0 - ...J LLJ W LLI p L7 CL w u � -iQN ¢ F_�U2HOw BVI>LUu-II)� Q z g �'i �'��ao ¢Z° V) -` (nn oUOZ< (9zu 0 �oz�U P"�o ZW z CO � LU F?LUZ LU U LU LU Z�V)U- ~LU im d z Q a� N 06 � M � V �.T luw w ^-, O7 .i V747.10 :1300W u�A'd6 "Lt�00-�1 aay5lu81�aC11L2ZD� 71auo[udalanap �a�eMa71VM rz,-Ok,;Mm1S O3CaYA-s :;IH wzp:P5:8 ICdL/L/b '3J.tlA I ¢ }( oU=�==!L LUQ~a-ulo o �z_P0� F LU LU 0 � } ��~-jUO L i p�QpC9��0 �Z��Ul nLu(DLuu)oa° F-Z"zxzcn m,...,�< mnw Q UJ OF=ULU 0 a -o �mw � U "" LU =) Q"�—UjQzZ to 0 Z ?o U Lu LULU U Z� Q u6p•d6""jZZpp-�1��4S1U�lS'aO1LZZ00-�L7uacuCalawp �aTam�71+1M �TtO171111J15.1,�COd'd1�5 ��"1� t� N o N N p W o L U © O x Z a U L u LL � w � z aZ LL 2 Lis LL ac � � m u a LU Z H v C) c�. m U"t �^rye s Ld G r Wd S6:LQ:Z 7 rOVT146 :31tl4 JG'W � o If ! Q L ¢ ate ¢ �CCU - C) ¢ I 0 v- 74 7 � u � F � w W ' � F a n Ln Ci Ln Ni 'J !a is LU g V °E II W a 3 0 cd LULU ~z LU 05o o a � w �S v, rn Nmr pt r LugE. Lug. �� � _ do r y� ISM a 4�, �� � W ¢ma y gill! I lmv � LL � [LI iu�5 L� N b N r � a. ,•w Lu O U uj >- N ❑ II Cti Z a U LL O a Z LL �] LL m o w � � N 0 N LZ � a e t V 7� OZLU 00 z N I tr- t� Il H� f •^+�. v4j a7 ¢ ©�! Lrsw QLr] LuUi N F< -uu"i }' LLL. C� LLL•Nh0 QUJ A.. om �... ■� Ltj 0 E ixa: -j 0r W� .sW> WCZ) zry©fit Lr1U7+•IC.ILLJ LOW— OW— LL d ap ��F" � yy 0 Q�yd l} -u l}- LU x O�11 Q� I / m N� �O =q /__I sx3i �dwtA 1 } W LU jLU UdG16�Y pw .. UZ 100 Z. 0. Z,w;vm to OCR �� f �y aam if Lco -W �M'❑w rV iL z J "in z .z f f M tn .-4 U w O Ln -., LL.4 ¢Z � � l I ! c• 1 1 !O 3 a�$r �j° 5t HE w 4 4 46 s 00 wa �- I m 7•'. a� t tn Ica -� c:LuQxo 040 Lo Le) LL z w c Q w e <? `_.•. tn L.i 3:Lu M00as �� ' a. �5 0� ZN> o� ��.�``�I ;:. e a� x d CL Q Zn U -j o' :• x L'"a LU co ti •o _i, • a 'a y �^ 1 6� � :•p� i 0 v- 74 7 � u � F � w W ' � F a n Ln Ci Ln Ni 'J !a is LU g V °E II W a 3 0 cd LULU ~z LU 05o o a � w �S v, rn Nmr pt r LugE. Lug. �� � _ do r y� ISM a 4�, �� � W ¢ma y gill! I lmv � LL � [LI iu�5 L� N b N r � a. ,•w Lu O U uj >- N ❑ II Cti Z a U LL O a Z LL �] LL m o w � � N 0 N LZ � a e t V 7� w o a 0 Ln t7� U LUU W LUZ ¢Z pgry w z !O 3 a�$r �j° 5t HE w 4 4 46 CL 4 ueld aaLn - I maaow �+6A du��crzoa-�l ��La5ly$, aurrno auuauado�anaa 1��cM r�crM�szaat rr u�tisa� roa��s :ml� Md SI:So:z IIaZIYI6 :31vo .L unL17Aju+4 'ned.L Nld 41d'Grxrl_13S a3nrda 101d W / IlJ € �17 V f€I / Q ir1 i c � a�'• to l� `� �,ti ,�. x � LU � `!- 1:3 a g p❑ cz Q IV r �.; amu. Lu LU Z Q 4-1 559'L ov ° o a Li ts..' ys. 1. �•;.4 s ~i "'•`' .oy � �'� 0.2 IV J [1`��'7_, =� 'e S ,4, h • ' g• � -A ,�LL w •-, P, V � LLI � W.L. f "f I i v v� ` X, 60 W J ` •� t L LZ L yam} LLJ u .v J, t -: tW a O iOM N •q.: D •E W .i v wad ww ° ' 125,00 a �d F•' N 2i17 t Y 0 o5, (� Q u 7 wy qp m m m `6 NQ.� W n n 5,C [O Lj3 Lfl L9 ( on z ❑ x LU wow w Z a 3�¢M°T 1 z C7VI a LAJ �N �n z X1 M 13 'U 0 �¢� ..r � V � A7 VLLJ � Q _� N a N a o h a �- � LLJ r°-°?� `�u"¢ � �,oQ (A =z z LU LU LU rLu � � Wzzr L MI, z m t� �a LU ti W (L, 0rp 0 2 N � •G � N W W d ` "fir C^GS W Z i �b�A tl.N.. d C1 Y uC z �xu;w � a V LN _5 44Wf LIJ NJ y ¢_ (n .- V Lu H- W inz�m Erna F. o���� Nps da {l LLJ F- t7 0D0 rU LL w ",r �Lu W O M d0!XiLCu. d l L 1 b W a 5,C u v, c z u m LU r d a a s ueld aaLn - I maaow �+6A du��crzoa-�l ��La5ly$, aurrno auuauado�anaa 1��cM r�crM�szaat rr u�tisa� roa��s :ml� Md SI:So:z IIaZIYI6 :31vo .L unL17Aju+4 'ned.L Nld 41d'Grxrl_13S a3nrda 101d N N O W Q v U w ? p LU a Z z U w U LL- L 0 F- Z N Z LL d LL � m S o w � h fl Wd V:SO:Z TTOZIT16 :31tla Told N N +-s 6 Lu o � U o W z v � z UJ U Lu ULL LU '� D Z u� LL z LLALL m p W CM CL gI71 - c '"GLOWu�A'dl+! tZZ00-�1s73�451u61 g1G22GO-al�uaulde�anap 1a7�Maa14R7 £tZOl7X�lfJlSJ73tQ?Id1:S 313 Wd 9I:80.Z IIOZ1116 :3IVa lO'ld 0a W W w U jU LL! LU ❑ Q 3 z� ULU &_ z '"'ui U Z m w D Jce rim ¢ v m W ZW LU ~ Z LU J� ¢� LU >Lu ❑ 0 1 LUL n LUv W z J LLQ C) Q LnD Lu 0 o° Lu Ln _ Q ❑h- F- LU �- Q z w ❑ w ❑'"" � w U7U w -j U LL �� cl E— U 0- J� �� LUQ LU Lu Za Z � �_ �j �4 Q /rn LCIV LUV � riiji Sa'x• yR .Rg4 �!Y V/ '3R •'AA j gs..7D» I i I yG.4a5 yR.C3A •574.35] 155.71 7yA.R�6 g50..11� 65A•Tt c, a9Y • 45 993'9y5 { t.r 55.47a C71 21 Is 99A•Y3 / / � r 1 —1v + y � I�L I Z rQ V 0 a LU LL 0 ..� z © LU is aw i17 w O� �o (�� � W� c F c�: �- ti rte¢ jc 1 r LL .w�w m�pM =u.i❑LU ALn =OC):V©w 657• Q Q Li '"r ❑ ❑73.59 om �Z"Zxa� a Fw��l[.twpC7 7ys519 Q����❑�� ayg.U9Y Uzi �amU mU Oj uj a �j 0 R�Ez t7- WJ 0 m LU ce w tlgZ,TY1 z L U Q a Asad�"�azaa�t rs�uar�al�zxaa�uu�udo�anAq Jv�Msara� szzvl�znza roaat s :812 Wb'9r.,LU.,rr rrozrem ova'Loki Date: September 7, 2011 To: Community Development and Natural Resources Department From: Engineering Department — Larry Popple #, City Engineer Public Works 7 Natural Resources Department — Ross Bintnerg Water Resources Engineer Subject: Bluffs of Candy Cove(Project 10-122) The Engineeringt Department and Public Works Natural Resources epartment has re iewed the e preliminary reliminar and final plat for the subject project with draft plan date of September 1, 11 and we have the following con cents. Comments highlighted in bold text are of particular concern: General Comments and flat Comments 1. Permits from MNDOT and a SWP ire -List be obtained. 2, All parcels should be properly labeled with lot and block numbers. eveloped parcels should have their address shown on the plans. 3. A number of dashed lines are shown on the drawings and it is difficult to determine what these dashed lines are intended to represent. The legend for these dashed lines does not show these lines. It appears that easement is shown over proposed louse pads. Grading flan 1. A 17 foot wall i proposed to within 3 feet of the adjacent property. The type of gall p p system needs to be specified on the plans. Construction details will be necessary. 2. The retaining wallsro osed near the existing hon -ie � at 5554 Candy Cove Trail ill e p p erratic in elevation as it matches into existing ground. In addition, a Nvall that was created with the development of 5584 Candy Cove Trail will be removed with the proposed gg p grading. The Developer er is encouraged to work with the neighbor to grade in a way that colliplemelits the existing and proposed hones. 3. All retainingwalls constructed in the public right of way must e mortarless Concrete block retaining wall. Delineate type of walls on plans. Retaining walls require fencing if over 4 feet in height or more than one tier. 4. The top and bottom wall elevations are not shown for the shod wall near the garage for lot 3. . The 918 elevation on lot 2 is not properly tying into the retaining wall in this area. 6, Drainagepaths are shown flowing over the top of retaining walls. how will this water be safely conveyed Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 l Nv%N cityofpriorlake. om . Once constructed, stormwater features nnu t be protected until the home sites are restored, Notes detailing how these are protected must be added to the plans. . Due to the bluff impacts of this project, The Developer should provide a report and calculations prepared by a licensed professional engineer in the state of Minnesota on the bluff stability. Consult section 1104.305 of the City Ordinances. Any charges jade to the plan will require a new analysis. Interim Grading Flan A. separate grading plan was submitted for grading prior to the individual lot grading. The comments below are in addition to the comments above, for the grading plan. I. It was understood that a fill area was going to be created by the initial grading to help balance the site. As the interim grading plan is shown, the soil would be removed with initial grading, but imported soil would need to return to the site as homes are built. . The interim grading plan creates stormwater conveyance issues s it concentrates flows. Site Rydrology, water Qualitv and Storin Sewer . CN reductions are required before structural volume control measures are to b considered. Court tree replacement credits and consider soil amendments and pervious surfaces. 2. Design information for infiltration feature should meet the requirements in the PWDM. Infiltration tests will be taken after please 1 grading: development contract should include provision for design alternate to remediate soil to provide inore infiltration if rates are not met. 3. Pretreatment for sediment removal is required ahead of infiltration BMP, contours do not seem to describe flow paths consistent with flow path arrows to the infiltration BMP, and elsewhere. The infiltration feature i de igned to capture small section of the new impenFious; while its volume nay exceed the requirement It is underutilized and will not meet the volume control standard. At what storm does it finally become filly utilized` what hifiltration rate is assumed in the design? Volume of voids in BMP is modeled incorrectly at loo%, what is the assumed void volume? Please provide answers to each in the narrative portion of the stormwater management report. Where sloes the daylight on slope and how is erosion potential managed' Rate control outlet to infiltration BMP should b e maintainable. 4. Filtration/rate control cistern feature is not a maintainable design, Drain tiles and rate control reducer should include threaded caps that can be easily accessed and removed to allow system to be inspected and cleaned. Filtration aggregate should not be included, as it will clog and not be maintainable, Where does the daylight on slope and h ow 'I's erosion potential managed? . Please provide drainage map to describe assumptions in the date control m el. 6. Drainage concentrated on 1 .o,W line will cause an erosion issue and may endanger talIs. This issue requires coordination with structural engineer, or a revised plan for drainage paths. Recommend planning micro scale drainage areas to disconnect and safely convey roof water to treatment and provide stable flow paths. Two concentrated drainage paths s flow over or along 10-131 walls, or over 3- ' wall. . The treatment systems are on private property and are assumed to remain under private ownership. The continued ffinction of the treatment systems are required; therefore maintenance plan and agreement will be required, binding property owners to maintain the system at its designed average level of service 8. SWPPP notes Sheet 3, 6 and 7 should be reviewed to agree and reduce redundancy. Much of the content from these 3 sheets can be included in a SWPPP document (usually . x I l folder form). (next line of comments S�she t, N=rote) S3NIO where are designated discharge points? S3NI2 provide temporary ESC plan for initial phase grading. S3N13 update to meet requirements of new construction site NPDES permit. S3N24 does not meet permit requirements for exposed soils. S3N22 provide inspection form in SWPPP document, S7N1c. provide training documentation forms in SIATH document, . The design engineer is encouraged to call Priori Lake Water Resources Engineer•, Ross Bin ner at 952-447-9831 Kith questions on any hydrological, hydraulic, and SWPPP coimnerts, Street and Utilities 1. The drives ay width must be a maximum of 24 feet Within City Dight of Way. 2. An easement agreement will be needed for the driveway access, grading, and retaining walls, on City prop ill. . The invent elevation shown for lot. 3 is at the low floor elevation. Typically the invert elevation is a few feet below the low floor elevation. 4. The utility lines for lot 3 are shown connecting at the garage. Is this intentional? It is suggested that the utility lines connect to a livable area of the hoine. Og PRION Aw Development Review Memo T f Jason Miller, Whitewater Development From: Jeff Matzke, l e, Planner CQ Dacey 917/11 Re: Review 5 — The Bluffs of Candy Core (Combined Pre/Final Plat & Variances) The following is a list of comme nts from the C DN R Dept. review: 1) Provide draft Final Plat page. 2) Preliminary Plat : Indicate separate late setback from 904 elevation to the nearest point of a gall greater than 5 feet and to the building pad area for Lot 2. Also indicate late setback to the building pad for Lot 3. 3 Provide impervious surface breakdown of pad areas, driveway areas, and access drive for each lot rather than only total for each lot. Impervious surface for Lot 3 must not exceed 5% of minimum lot area according to MN Statute 394.30 (c). 4) What is XC identifying between walls on Lot Rename "Bluff Zone!' line to `Toe of Bluff Area 6) Remove gall encroachment on Lot `l on Preliminary Plat and Grading Plan. 7 Revise tree removallreplacement plan to distinguish trees located within city -owned access parcel and private lots and recalculate tree replacement percentages. Eliminate tree replacement from bluff area in Lot I rear card (additional 48"+ should be identified as saved). Current proposal indicates 170 caliper inches of tree replacement is required. With additional saved trees in Lot I bluff area, proposed tree replacement requirement appears to be reduced to approximately 146 Proposed replacement plan identifies 325' of trees. consider increasing size of some trees from 2.6' to 3.6' or Eft. to 8ft. heights to meet additional approximate 14" (146"-132") required replacement. Devise Tree l emovalll eplacement Plan accordingly, 8) Property owner(s) shall eater into an agreement ent with the cit} prior to the construction of the retaining walls on city Property. 9 Variances needed for current proposal: a. Bluff variance for all lots to allow construction of structures and grading in a bluff zone. b. 5 foot driveway setback for all lots foot variance from 5 foot min requirement) c. 25 foot front yard variance for Lot I {variance to allow retaining gall along access driveway. . 43 foot late setback variance for Lot 2 2 foot variance from min requirement) e. o foot side yard setback variance for Lot 2 1 o foot variance from minimum requirement ent to allow retaining wall along property lire) f. 30 foot lake setback for Lot 3 foot variance from the 75 foot minimum requirement) . 5 foot front setback for Lot 3 2 foot variance from the 2 foot minimus requirement) . 10,077 square foot lot area for Lot 3 }923 square foot variance from 15,000 min.) Page AGENDA ITEM: 4B SUBJECT: CONSIDER COMBINED PRELIMINARY Al f D FINAL PLAT FOR DEVELOPMENT To BE KNOWN AS THE BLUFFS of CANDY COVE SITE PIDS 25..027-023-05 25-027-024-09 25-027-025-0 PREPARED ED BY: JEFF MAT F E, PLANNER PUBLIC BEADING: X YES NO -N/A DATE: SEPTEMBER 12, 2011 INTRODUCTION Jason Miller has applied for approval of a residential development to be known as The Bluffs of Candor Cove on the property located at PID 25-027-023-0$ 26-027-024-01 25-027-025-0. The site is located along Candy Cove on Prior Labe at the intersection of Candor Cove Trail and State Highway 13. The request calls for the subdivision of the existing common ownership property lot into three single-family residential lets. On August 8, 2011 the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the proposed plat. At the meeting some local residents voiced concerns relating to the removal of a portion of the hill near the intersection of candor Cove Trail and Hwy 13 which provides an element of a sound buffer to the Candor Cove Trail neighborhood. After discussion of the project, the Planning Commission chose to continue the public hearing and discussion to the September 12, 2011 meeting to allow the applicant additional time to respond to City Staff engineering comments related to grading and storm water designs; PHYSICAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS: ACTE1 ISTICS: Total site Area: The total site consists of 1.07 acres. Topograp.h. This site has an extremely steep topographer} with elevations ranging from 984' MSL at its highest point to 904' MSL at the lowest point. Vegetation: The property is a vacant, wooded area on the southern shores of Candor Cove. The project is subject to the Tree Preservation requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Wetlands: No wetlands are located on the site. Access: Access to the site is from Candy Cove Trail through a vacant, City -owned property (25-936- 075-0). 2--936-- 0 -o . 2030 Coml2rehensive Plan De i nation: This property is designated for Urban Low Density Residential -LD uses on the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Lard Use Map. onrn The site is located within the --'i Zoning District Low Density Residential). The R-1 district is consistent with the proposed R --LD designation. This district permits a maximum in um density of 4.0 units per acre. Phone 952.1147.9800 Fxx 952.447.42451 w-wwrxit FUpriorla . om Shoreland: The site is located within the shoreland district and is subject to the Shoreland ordinance (section 11 04) including but not limited to bluff impact zone, impervious surface, and late setback requirements. P o oS r I LAN L The combined preliminary and final plat consists of 3 proposed riparian lots for single family dwellings. Lot 1 is 23,360 square feet, Lot 2 is 151159, and Lot 3 is 1O#077 square feet. Prop .,, : Flatted In 1921, the 5 originally putted lets (nova under common ownership) had direct access from Candor Cove Trail. In 1960, with the development of state Highway 13, the State of Minnesota acquired a portion of the lots and Candor Cove Trail was realigned to intersect Hwy 13. The City owns a parcel of land between the lots and the current alignment of Candy Cove Trail. The lets are proposed to have access through the City -owned parcel to Candy Cove Trail through a shared access driveway. In order to achieve the driveway access a portion of the hill on the City -owned parcel near the intersection of Candor Cove Trail and Hwy 13 is being proposed for removal including a retaining gall which was installed on City property gears ago by the adjacent property owner, A new retaining wall system is proposed to be installed within the City -owned parcel with coniferous trees to be placed for screening and buffering purposes. Sanitary sewer[warter Maims A sanitary sewer pipe and water main exist within the right-of-way of State Highway 13. Utility services for the 3 lots are proposed to connect to this sanitary sewer pipe and water main. Storm sewer: Grading on the site will direct runoff to newly dedicated drainage and utility easements Tong the perimeter of all the properties. The developer shall designate additional storm water treatment methods as required under the Public Works Design n 1anual. Landscaping: The Subdivision Ordinance requires a minimum of two trees in the front card for all newly created lots, Free Replacement: The applicant has submitted an inventory identifying 1597.5 caliper inches of significant trees on the site. The Zoning Ordinance allows up to 35% for building pads and driveways. According to the proposed plan, 899.0 caliper inches will be removed resulting in the need for 170.0 caliper inches of replacement required. The applicant should submit revised plans identifying saved trees in the bluff area on tint 1 which is not proposed for grading. Fees and Assessment: This property Inas satisfied the trunk and utility development fees associated with the site as a result of previous paid sanitary sewer and water assessments related to a utility project in 1974. A N A LYR 1 IS ! The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into 3 riparian single family dwellings. Lots 1 & 2 conform to the R-1 riparian minimum requirements of 90 feet in width at the front }card line, 75 feet in width at the ordinary High Water Elevation of Prior Lake, 15,000 square feet in area, and less than 4.0 units per acre in density. While Lot 3 does not conform to the minimum lot area requirement it does meet the area requirement for a buildable lot of record under IN Statute 394.36 c. The applicant has a pending variance request from the minimum um lot area requirement for Lot 3 required by City Ordinance. In addition, to establish building pads for the 3 lots the following pending variances are requested: a. A variance to allow a structure to be located in the bluff impact zone on Lots 1, 22 3 (Section 04.303), . A 5 foot variance from the required minimum 5 foot driveway side yard setback for Lots 11 21 & 3 (Section 1107.20 (1)). c. A 25 foot variance from the minimum 25 foot front yard setback required In the R-1 Zoning Use District for Lot 1 (Section 1102.405 (3)). d. A 32 foot variance from the minimum 75 foot lake setback required in the Shoreland District for Let 2 (Section 1104.308. (2 e. A 20 foot variance from the minimum 25 feet front card setback required in the R-1 Zoning Use District for Lot 3 (Section 1102.405 (3)). f. A 45 foot variance from the minimum 75 foot lake setback required in the Shoreland District for Lot 3 (Section 1104.308. (2 g. A {4}923 foot variance from the required minimum lot area for a riparian residential lot on a General Development Lake within the Shorerand District for Lot 3 (Section 1104.302 (3)). The combined preliminary and final plat application will comply with all relevant ordinance provisions and City standards outside of the pending variance requests. The plat as presented cannot be approved until the pending variance request approvals are granted. City Staff also recommends the following conditions of approval be met: . The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City prior to grading and construction within the City -owned parcel. 3. The applicant shall address all engineering comments as outlined in the memorandum from the City Engineer dated September 7, 2011, . The following pending variances are granted: a, A variance to allow a structure to be located In the bluff impact zone on Lots 1, 2} & 3 (Section 1104.303). foot variance from the required minimum 5 foot driveway side card setback for Lots 2} & 3 (Section 1107.0 (1)). c. A 25 foot variance from the minimum 25 foot front yard setback required in the -1 Zoning Use District for Lot 1 (Section 1102.405 (3))t . A 20 foot variance from the minimum 75 foot lake setback required In the Shoreland District for Lot 2 (Section 1104.3 0 8. . e. A 25 foot variance from the minimum 25 foot front yard setback required In the - Zoning Use District for Lot 3 (Section 1102.405 (3)). f. A 45 foot variance from the minimum 76 foot lake setback required in the Shoreland District for Lot 3 (Section 1104.30 8. 2. = A 4,923 foot variance from the required minimum lot area for a riparian residential lot o a General Development Lake within the S oreland District for Lot 3 (Section 1104.302 3- 5. The applicant shall address all comments as outlined in the memorandum r from the Community Development Department dated September 7, 2011, 6. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and pay any required development fees. . The applicant shall obtain required permits from all applicable governmental agencies prior to final plat approval. 8. The final plat shall be recorded at Scott County within 60 days of approval by the City Council. ALTERNATIVES: Recommend approval oft e Combined Preliminary and Final Plat subject to conditions. . Table this item to a date specific, and provide the developer with direction on the issues that have been discussed. 3. Recommend denial of the Combined Preliminary and Final Plat request. RECOMMENDATION,,- The ECO ME DATIONThe Planning staff recommends Alternative #2. RECOMMENDED ACTION The recommendations by staff require the following motion: . A motion and second to table the discussion of the combined preliminary and final plat until the applicant has the opportunity to reprise the development plans. ATTACHMENTS Location map 2. Development Pians 3. Engineering Dept. Memorandum dated -7-11 . Community Development Dept, memorandum dated 9-7--11 AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: 4646 Dakota Street S Prior Lake, MN 55372 PRESENTER: PUBLIC HEARING: DATE: INTRODUCTION. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT c PUBLIC HEARING To CONSIDER A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT To ALLOW A RESTAURANT To CONTINUE As A RESTAURANT SERVING LIQUOR IN THE c-2 (GENERAL BUSINESS) DISTRICT JEFF I I TIE, PLANNER YES NO -N/A SEPTEMBER 12, 2011 Bruce Larson has applied for a conditional use permit to allow a restaurant with liquor in the C-2 (General Business) Commercial Zoning District. The site is located at 15750 Hwy 13 South, north of Counter State Aid Highway 44, at the intersection of Franklin Trail and MN state Trunk Highway 13. PHYSICAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS: Total Site Area: The site is 2.3 acres. Toho -graph :. The subject site varies in elevation from gob MSL to 942 MSL. Vegetation: The site contains a commercial building horsing a retail bait and tackle shop and a restaurant with a shared parking area. otherwise} the remainder of the site is largely wooded areas of varying topographer. Access: Access to the site is from southeast at the intersection of State Trunk Highway 13 Franklin Trail. 2030 Comprehensive ensive Plan Designation: This property is designated C -CC. for Community Retail Shopping on the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. onin : The site area is zoned C-2 (General Business). ANALYSIS: The site currently occupied by the Cove Restaurant has been the site of a variety of restaurant uses. Indeed, 5 separate restaurants have occupied the site since 1992. The Cove Restaurant has been in business at the current location since 2007. With the recent renewal of the liquor license of the Cove Restaurant the City Council imposed a condition of approval that the use obtain a Conditional Use Permit in compliance with the currently City Zoning ordinance, Section 1102.1103 (5) of the Zoning Ordinance. The granting a Conditional Use Permit will bring the existing Cove Restaurant within compliance of the City Zoning Ordinance for future annual renewals of the liquor license for the restaurant. hone 952.447.9800 Fax 952.447.4245 WN%FW. cityMpriorlake.com CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) ANALYSIS: Section 1108.200 of the City Code sets forth the criteria for approval of a CUP. (1) The use is consistent with and supportive of the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, Two of the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan are to "determine and strive for a balance of commerce, industry and population" and to "'maintain high standards in the promotion and development of commerce and industry." This proposal will be consistent with the goals, objectives} and policies of the Comprehensive Plan provided it complies with the conditions of approval. Another objective of the Comprehensive Plan is to "enact and maintain policies and ordinances to ensure the public safety, health and welfare.' The proposed restaurant with liquor use would appear consistent with these policies. (2) The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of properties in close proximity to the conditional use. Based on staff review, the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The conditions of the approving resolution are intended to ensure ongoing protection of the community. (3) The use is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance and the Use District in which the Conditional Use is located. Section 1102.1103 (5 of the Zoning Ordinance allows a restaurant with liquor is an allowed use within the C-2 Zoning District. The conditions set forth in the Zoning Ordinance will be met with the issuance of the Conditional Use permit. (4) The use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities, services, or improvements which are either existing or proposed. The use will not have adverse impacts on governmental facilities. No further construction improvements are proposed with the CUP request. (5) The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of properties in close proximity to the conditional use. The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment ent f properties in close proximity. The use is separated from adjacent residential properties by a highly wooded area with varying topographer. (6) The use is subject to the design and other requirements of site and landscape plans prepared by or under the direction of a professional landscape architect, or civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota, approved by the city Council and incorporated as part of the conditions imposed on the use by the City Council. No site pian modifications are currently proposed from the existing conditions on site. (7) The use is subject to drainage and utility plans prepared by a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota which illustrate locations of city water, city serer, fire hydrants, manholes, power, telephone and cable lines, natural gas mains, and other service facilities. The plans shall be included as part f the conditions set forth in the CUP approved by the City Council. No engineering plan modifications are currently proposed from the existing conditions on site. (8) The use is subject to such other additional conditions which the City Council may find necessary to protect the general welfare, public safety and neighborhood character. such additional conditions may be imposed in those situations where the other dimensional standards, performance standards, conditions or requirements in this ordinance are insufficient to achieve the objectives contained in subsection 1108.202. In these circumstances, the City Council may impose restrictions and conditions on the CUP, which are more stringent than those set forth in the ordinance and which are consistent with the general conditions above. The additional conditions shall be set forth in the CUP approved by the City council. Additional conditions to ensure the protection of the general health, safety and welfare of the public are included as part of the CUP. These conditions include approval of permits from other governmental agencies. CONCLUSION Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit request, subject to the following conditions: a The applicant shall record the Conditional Use Permit at Scott County no later than 60 days after approval. b The Conditional Use Permit is subject to the issuance of required permits from all applicable governmental agencies. c Conditions outlined in Section 1102.1103 of the City Code, related to Restaurants with Liquor as a use permitted by a Conditional Use Permit} shall be adhered to. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the CUP subject to the above conditions. 2. Table this item to a date specific, and provide the applicant with direction on the issues that have been discussed. . Deny the request based on specific findings of fact. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends Alternative 1. ACTION REQUIRED: motion and second to approve Resolution 1-0 PC approving the CUP, subject to the listed conditions. ATTACHMENTS: . Resolution I 1-06PC 2. Location Map � "M Prior Lake, NM 55372 �-Ilwrwasoljtl CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 11-06PC A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A RESTAURANT SERVING LIQUOR IN THE C-2 (GENERAL BUSINESS) ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, The Prior Lake Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on September 12, 2011, to consider an application from Bruce Larson to allow a restaurant serving liquor in the C--2 (General Business) Zoning District} and WHEREAS, Notice of the public hearing on said CLAP was duly published hed in accordance with the applicable Prior Lake Ordinances; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission proceeded to hear all persons interested in this CUP and persons interested were afforded the opportunity to present their views and objections related to the CUP; and WHEREAS, S, The Planning Commission finds the proposed CUP is compatible with the stated purposes and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as they relate to conditionally permitted uses, and further, that the proposed CUP meets the criteria for approval of CUP as contained in Section 1108.202 of the Zoning Ordinance. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF PRIOR LAKE; . The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein. 2. The Planning Commission hereby adopts the following findings: a. The use is consistent with and supportive of the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Two of the objectives of the Comprehensive ive Plan are to "'determine ine n tripe for a balance of commerce) industry and population" and to "maintain high standards in the promotion and development of commerce and industry." This proposal will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Flan provided it complies with the conditions f approval. Another objective of the Comprehensive Plan is to "enact and maintain policies and ordinances o ensure the public safety, health andwelfare."" The proposed restaurant with liquor use would appear consistent with these policies. t The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of properties in close proximity to the conditional use. Based on staff review, the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The conditions of the approving resolution are intended to ensure ongoing protection of the community. Ph o ne 952.447.9800 / Max 952.447.4245 Nvww. c i 1yo fp ri orl ake. c om c. The use is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Zoning ordinance and the Use District in which the conditional Use is located, Section 1102.1103 f the Zoning Ordinance allows a restaurant with liquor is an allowed use within the c-2 Zoning District. The conditions set forth in the Zoning ordinance will b met with the issuance of the Conditional Use permit. d. The use will not Frage undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities, services, or improvements which are either existing or proposed. The use will not have adverse impacts on governmental facilities. No further construction improvements are proposed with the CCP request, e. The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of properties in close proximity to the conditional use, The use will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of properties in close proximity. The use is separated from adjacent residential properties by a highly wooded area with varying topography. f. The use is subject to the design and other requirements of site and landscape plana prepared by or under the direction of a professional landscape architect, or civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota, approved by the city council and incorporated as part of the conditions imposed on the use by the city council. No site purr modifications ations are currently proposed from the existing conditions on site . The use is subject to drainage and utility plans prepared by a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota which illustrate locations of city water, city surer, fire hydrants, manholes, power, telephone and cable lines, natural gas mains, and other service facilities. The plans shall he included as part of the conditions set forth in the CIDP approved by the city council. No engineering plan modifications are currently proposed from the existing conditions on site. h. The use is subject to such other additional conditions which the city council may find necessary to protect the general welfare, public safety and neighborhood character. such additional conditions may be imposed in those situations where the other dimensional standards, performance standards, conditions or requirements in this ordinance are insufficient to achieve the objectives contained in subsection 1108.202. In these circumstances, the city council may impose restrictions and conditions on the CUP which are more stringent than those set forth in the ordinance and which are consistent with the general conditions above. The additional conditions shall be set forth in the CUP approved by the city council* Additional conditions to ensure the protection of the general health, safety and welfare of the public are included as part of the CF. These conditions include approval of permits from other governmental agencies. 3. The CUP is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions: a The applicant shall record the Conditional Use Permit at Scott County no later than 60 days after approval. b The Conditional Use Permit is subject to the issuance of required permits from all applicable governmental agencies. c) Conditions outlined in Section 1102.1103 of the Cit} Cede, related to Restaurants with Liquor as a use permitted by a Conditional Use Permit, shall be adhered to. CONCLUSION Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit to allow a restaurant searing liquor within the C-2 (General Business) Zoning District. The contents of Planning Case File #EP I 1 -121 is hereby entered into and rade a part of the public record and the record of the decision for this case. Passed and adopted this 12th day of September, 2011. Paul Perez, Acting Commission Chair ATTEST: Dan Rogness, Community & Economic Development Director The Cove Restaurant - Conditional Use Permit Variance This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information, and data located in various city, county, and state offices, and other sources affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. Scott County is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. If discrepancies are found, please contact the Scott County Surveyors Office. Map Scale N inch = 272 feet WE Map Date 9/6/2011 S AGENDA ITEM: 6D SUBJECT: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED LIMITED ALCOHOLIC SERVICE HOURS T ALLOW RESTAURANT To SERVE ALCOHOL UNTIL 11 SITE ADDRESSES: 15750 HWY 1SOUTH PREPARED BY: JEFF MAT I E, PLANNER PUBLIC HEARING: X YES Ido-Il1A DATE: SEPTEMBER 1 , 201'1 INTRODUCTION Bruce Larson, owner of the Cove Restaurant, has requested a variance from the limited alcoholic service hours for a restaurant to serge liquor in the C-2 (General Business) Commercial Zoning District. The site is located at 15750 Hwy 3 South, north of County State Aid Highway 44, at the intersection of Franklin Trail and MN State Trunk Highway 13. The applicants request the following variances: • A variance from the 10 PM limitation requirement to allow the serving of alcohol until 2 AM Monday through Sunday for a restaurant structure in the C-2 (General Business) Zoning District that is within loo feel of a residential property lire. (Section 1102.1103 (5)). BACKGROUND The property is zoned C-2 (General Business) and SD Shoreland Overlay District)} and is guided C-CC(Community Retail shopping) on the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The site contains a commercial building housing a bait and tackle retail shop and a restaurant with a shared parking area. n is c t tqsION The applicant is proposing to change the hours of alcoholic service at the restaurant to alloy for service until 2 AM, Monday through Sunday. The current restaurant is serves alcoholic beverages until 1 AM. Recently the City amended the Zoning ordinance for restaurants with liquor which are located within loo feet of residential property to alloy for alcoholic service until 10 HM on Sunday through Thursday and until I Ipm Friday, Saturday, and holidays. Upon enacting of this ordinance change the Cove Restaurant has been currently identified as a nonconforming use for the reason that its current 1 AM alcoholic service time does not comply with the new ordinance change. In the specific case of the Cove Restaurant site, however; there is a topographical and vegetative buffer between the restaurant building and the nearby residential properties. This level of buffering is specific to the site and is not generally found in other locations throughout the City between other commercial and residential properties. Also, while the restaurant building is approximately 60 feet to the nearest residential property line, the closest maintained rear card within the nearly residential area lies over 250 feet from Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 / %%,%%,w. iityfl)riorla . oiii the restaurant building. The applicant believes that a 2 AM service time charge is not drastically different from the 1 AM current service time but would allow for additional business opportunities. ANALYSIS, 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) There are practical difficulties in complying with the strict terms of the ordinance. "Practical difficu[ties," as used in connection with the granting of a Variance, means the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties exist for the property owners. Due to the unique topography and wooded vegetative buffering between the restaurant building and the residential properties to the north} the use would be screened from residential properties. In addition, the distance from the restaurant building to the nearest maintained residential rear yard area is more than 250 feet which is greater than the 100 foot requirement between residential properties and restaurant buildings which are limited on hours of alcoholic service. (2) The granting of the Variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City Subdivision and Zoning ordinances and the Comprehensive Plan. The granting of the variance is within harmony of the general purposes of the ordinance. Due to the distance and topographical and vegetative buffers between the uses the intent of the Zoning Ordinance requirement in this case will be achieved to separate the two land uses of residential properties and restaurants with liquor. The Zoning ordinance strives to "provide for compatibility of different land uses by segregating} controlling, and regulating unavoidable nuisance producing uses." In this case the physical distance between usable maintained areas and the specific natural buffers segregate the differing land uses. (3) The granting of the Variance is necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property 1 n olved. The variances are necessary to use the property in a reasonable manner. The site is zoned -2 (General Business) District and a restaurant with liquor service is an allowed and a reasonable use within the C-2 Zoning District. (4) The practical difficulty is due to circumstances unique to the property not resulting from actions of the owners of the property and is not a mere convenience to the property owner and applicant. The practical difficulty in this case is due to the unique shape and natural topography of the commercial lot. While the restaurant building is approximately 60 feet to the nearest residential property, the closest maintained rear yard within the nearby residential area lies over 250 feet from the restaurant building. (5) The granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or e detrimental to the health and safety of the public welfare. The granting of the variances will not alter the character of the neighborhood. In exception to the requested alcoholic service time change from 1 AM to 2 AM, no current change to the overall site is proposed. (6) The granting of the Variance will not result in allowing any use of the property that is not permitted in the zoning district where the subject property is located. The restaurant with liquor use is a permitted use within the C_2 (General Business) Zoning District. (7) The granting of the Variance is necessary to alleviate an inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The current proposal does not involve any proposed solar energy systems. CONCLUSION The applicant proposes to change the end of alcoholic service form 1 AM to 2 AM. The Zoning Ordinance limitation which the applicant requests the variance is applicable for restaurants buildings which h area within 100 feet of nearby residential properties. While the restaurant building is approximately 60 feet to the nearest residential property line, the closest maintained rear yard within the nearby residential area lies over 250 feet from the restaurant building. in addition, varying topography and wooded vegetative buffering lies between the restaurant building and the residential properties to the north. Therefore City Staff recommends approval of the requested variance subject to the following listedconditions: 1. This resolution must be recorded at Scott County within 60 days of adoption. . The applicant shall obtain approval of an application for a 2 AIM Liquor License from the Minnesota Department of Public Safety. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve the variance as presented. 2. Table or continue discussion of the Item for specific purpose. I Deny the variance because the Planning Commission finds a lack of demonstrated practical difficulties under the Zoning ordinance criteria, RECOMMENDED ACTION The recommendations by staff require the following motions: 1. A motion and second to approve resolution PCI 1-05 subject to the listed conditions. ATTACHMENTS I. resolution PC 11-0 2. Location map A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE CE FCO THE REQUIRED LIMITED ALCOHOLIC SERVICE HOURS To ALLOW A RESTAURANT To SERVE ALCOHOL UNTIL 2 AM E IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Adjustment of the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. Bruce Larson is requesting a variance from the required alcohol service hours of limitation to allow a restaurant to serge alcohol until 2 All at the following location, to wit; 5750 Hwy 13 South, Prior Lake, MN 55372 All that part of the Bast 600 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 3, Township 115, Flange 22, luring Northerly of the Northerly light -of -war lire of New State Trunk Highway No. 13, Scott County, Minnesota. 2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for the variance as contained in Case #11 - 121 and held a hearing thereon on September 12, 2011. . 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= . Tactical difficulties exist for the property owners. Due to the unique topographer and wooded vegetative buffering between the restaurant building and the residential properties to the north, the use would be screened from residential properties. In addition, the distance from the restaurant building to the nearest maintained residential rear yard area is more than 250 feet which is greater than the 100 foot requirement between residential properties and restaurant buildings which are limited on hours of alcoholic service. 5. The granting of the variance is within harmony of the general purposes of the ordinance. Due to the distance and topographical and vegetative buffers between the uses the intent of the Zoning Ordinance requirement in this case will be achieved to separate the two land uses of residential properties and restaurants with liquor. The Zoning ordinance strives to "provide for compatibility r of different land uses by segregating, controlling, and regulating unavoidable nuisance producing uses." In this case the physical distance between usable maintained areas and the specific natural buffers segregate the differing land uses. . The variances are necessary to use the property in a reasonable manner. The site is zoned C-2 (General Business) District and a restaurant with liquor service is an allowed and a reasonable use within the C-2 Zoning District. Phone 952.447.9800 / F� 952.447.4245 / %vwNv. ityofprior1 a . oin . The practical difficulty in this case is due to the unique shape and natural topographer of the commercial lot. Wile the restaurant building is approximately 60 feet to the nearest residential property, the closest maintained rear yard within the nearby residential area lies over 250 feet from the restaurant building. 8. The granting of the variances will net alter the character of the neighborhood. In exception to the requested alcoholic service time change from I AM to 2 AM, no current charge to the overall site is proposed. . The restaurant with liquor use is a permitted use within the C-2 (General Business) Zoning District. 10. The current proposal aloes not involve any proposed solar energy systems. CONCLUSION Based upon the Findings set forth above, the Board of Adjustment hereby approves the following variance from the required alcohol service hogs of limitation to allover a restaurant to serve alcohol until 2 AM on a C-2 (General Business) zoned property - A variance from the 10 PM limitation requirement o allow the serving of alcohol until 2 AM Monday through Sunday for a restaurant structure In the C-- (General Business) Zoning District that is within 100 feet of a residential propelire. (Section 1102.1103 (5)), The variance is subject to the following conditions: 1. This resolution must be recorded at Scott Counter within 60 days of adoption. . The applicant shall obtain approval of an application for a 2 AM Liquor License from the Minnesota Department of Public Safety. Adopted by the Board of Adjustment on September 12, 2011 Paul Peru, Acting Commission Chair ATTEST: Dan l ogness, Community & Economic Development ent Director