HomeMy WebLinkAbout4D- Eagle Creek Avenue SE Report
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: JULY 18, 2016
AGENDA #: 4D
PREPARED BY: DAN ROGNESS, COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
PRESENTED BY: DAN ROGNESS
AGENDA ITEM: AFTER CONDUCTING A PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDER APPROVING A
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM
LAKESHORE STRUCTURE SETBACK AT 16072 EAGLE CREEK AVE.
DISCUSSION: Introduction
Ron and Beth Brazier (property owners) are requesting a variance from the min-
imum lake setback from the Ordinary High Water elevation (904’ elevation). The
property includes an existing house located along the easterly shore Upper Prior
Lake. The following variance is requested:
• A 12-foot variance from the required minimum 75-foot structure set-
back from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) elevation of Prior Lake
(Section 1104.309).
Regulation Requirement Proposed Variance
Lakeshore Setback 75’ 63’ 12’
History
The property is zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential), and is guided R-LD (Urban
Low Density) on the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The property is
currently occupied. This lot was platted in 1921 as part of the Lakeside Park
plat.
Current Circumstances
The applicant proposes to construct a room addition onto the back of the house
using nearly the same footprint as the existing deck. Underneath the deck is an
existing lower room of the house; the deck cantilevers 6” beyond that room. The
deck area is currently 9’4” x 12’4”, which would be replaced by the room con-
structed over the deck at 9’4” x 14”10”. Therefore, the existing lakeshore setback
to the deck (65.5’) will add another 2’6” into the back yard for the proposed room
addition setback (63’). The cantilever over the existing lower room will extend
from 6 inches to 3 feet.
Conclusion
City Staff believes the variance requested is warranted due to the fact that the
existing lakeshore setback to the deck will not change more than 2’6” for the fu-
ture room addition. The “open space” of the deck area will be filled with en-
closed space and walls, which could potentially cause the southerly neighbor’s
2
view to the lake to be further obstructed. However, staff is not aware of this be-
ing an issue. There appears to be a practical difficulty associated with adding
the room without the shoreline setback variance since this type of infill addition
makes the most sense for the existing house design. For example, the existing
footings and foundation for the room underneath the deck will support the new
room addition. Therefore, City staff recommends approval of the requested
variance subject to the following conditions of approval:
• The variance resolution shall be recorded at Scott County. An acknowl-
edged City Assent Form, shall be submitted to the Community & Eco-
nomic Development Department prior to the issuance of a building per-
mit.
ISSUES: This project includes a request for a variance. Section 1108.400 states that the
Board of Adjustment may grant a variance from the strict application of the pro-
visions of the Zoning Ordinance, provided that:
• There 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. Response: Practical difficulties exist for the
applicant in this case due to the existing house location on the lot and the
specific deck location at the rear southwest corner of the house. The
applicant has chosen a location for the room addition based on the
existing room underneath the deck, which minimizes further expansion
outside the existing house footprint. This rationale appears to be
reasonable.
• 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. Response: Two purposes of the Zoning
Ordinance are to “promote the most appropriate and orderly development
of the residential, business, industrial, public land and public areas” and
“enhance the aesthetic character and appearance of the City.” The
approval of the variance as requested would allow the applicant to
construct a reasonable room addition on the site in an orderly fashion
within the confines of the existing house footprint on the lot.
• 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 or applicant.
Response: There is a practical difficulty related to the lakeshore setback
variance that is unique to this property due to the existing house footprint,
and more specifically, the existing deck that was constructed over a lower
room of the house. The proposed room addition will change the existing
lakeshore setback from 65.5’ to 63.0’, or a setback reduction of 2’6”.
• The granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of
the neighborhood or be detrimental to the health and safety of the
public welfare. Response: The granting of the variances will not alter
3
the existing character of the neighborhood. The existing setback to the
deck will be reduced another 2’6” for the room addition, resulting in a
proposed variance of 12’ from the required 75’ minimum, which is a minor
change to this property. Other property shoreline setbacks are 50’ to the
north, and 137’ to the south. These existing lakeshore setbacks do not
allow the averaging option to a minimum 50’ setback.
• 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. Response: A single family residence is
an allowed use in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Use District.
ALTERNATIVES: 1. Motion and a second to approve a resolution approving a 12-foot variance
from the minimum lakeshore setback at 16072 Eagle Creek Avenue as rec-
ommended by staff or further amended by the Commission.
2. Motion and a second to table this item and request staff to provide further
information as directed by the Commission.
3. Motion and a second to deny the variance because the Planning Commis-
sion finds a lack of demonstrated practical difficulties under the zoning code
criteria.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
Alternative #1
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map
2. Survey dated March 14, 2016
3. Building Plans
4. Site photo
1
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RESOLUTION 16-XXPC
APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LAKESHORE STRUCTURE SETBACK AT 16072 EAGLE CREEK AVENUE SE
Motion By: Second By:
WHEREAS, The Prior Lake Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustment conducted a public hearing on
July 18, 2016, to consider a request from Ron and ___ Brazier to approve a variance from the minimum
lakeshore setback in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District at the following property:
All that part of Lots 48 and 49, Lakeside Park, described as follows: Starting at the Southeast corner of
said Lot 49 and running thence Northwesterly along the East line of said Lot 49, 33.4 feet; thence due
West parallel to the North line of said Lot 49 to intersect the West line of said Lot 49; thence Southerly
65.0 feet to the center of the West line of said Lot 48; and thence Northeasterly to point of beginning,
Scott County Minnesota.
(PID 25-096-031-0)
WHEREAS, Notice of the public hearing on said variance request was duly published in accordance with the
applicable Prior Lake Ordinances; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission proceeded to hear all persons interested in this variance request, and persons
interested were afforded the opportunity to present their views and objections related to the variance
request; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has reviewed the application for the variance as contained in Case #DEV16-
001021 and held a public hearing thereon on July 18, 2016; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has considered the effect of the proposed variances upon the health, safety,
and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of
fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property values in the surrounding area and the effect of the
proposed variances on the Comprehensive Plan NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ACTING AS THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein.
2. The Planning Commission hereby adopts the following findings:
a) There 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. Response: Practical difficulties
exist for the applicant in this case due to the existing house location on the lot and the specific deck location
at the rear southwest corner of the house. The applicant has chosen a location for the room addition based
on the existing room underneath the deck, which minimizes further expansion outside the existing house
footprint. This rationale appears to be reasonable.
2
b) 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. Response: Two purposes of the
Zoning Ordinance are to “promote the most appropriate and orderly development of the residential, business,
industrial, public land and public areas” and “enhance the aesthetic character and appearance of the City.” The
approval of the variance as requested would allow the applicant to construct a reasonable room addition on
the site in an orderly fashion within the confines of the existing house footprint on the lot.
c) 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 or applicant.
Response: There is a practical difficulty related to the lakeshore setback variance that is unique to this
property due to the existing house footprint, and more specifically, the existing deck that was constructed over
a lower room of the house. The proposed room addition will change the existing shoreline setback from 65.5’
to 63.0’, or a setback reduction of 2’6”.
d) The granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or be detrimental to the health and safety of the public welfare. Response: The granting of the variances will
not alter the existing character of the neighborhood. The existing setback to the deck will be reduced another
2’6” for the room addition, resulting in a proposed variance of 12’ from the required 75’ minimum, which is a
minor change to this property. Other property shoreline setbacks are 50’ to the north, and 137’ to the south.
These existing shoreline setbacks do not allow the averaging option to a minimum 50’ setback.
e) 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. Response: A single family residence is an
allowed use in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Use District.
3. Based upon the findings set forth herein, the Planning Commission hereby approves the following variances
to allow a construction of a seasonal cabin in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District:
a. A 12- foot variance from the required minimum 75-foot structure setback from the Ordinary High Water
(OHW) elevation of Prior Lake (Section 1104.309)
4. The variances are subject to the following conditions of approval:
a. The variance resolution shall be recorded at Scott County. An acknowledged City Assent Form, shall
be submitted to the Community & Economic Development Department prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 18th DAY OFJULY, 2016.
_______________________________ Fleming, Commission Chair
ATTEST: _________________________________
Dan Rogness, Community & Economic Development Director
VOTE Fleming Kallberg Larson Petersen Tieman
Aye ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Nay ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Absent ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Abstain ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
L
A
K
E
S
I
D
E
A
V
S
E
E
A
G
L
E
C
R
E
E
K
A
V
S
E
Upper Prior Lake
Ü
16072 Eagle Creek Avenue Variance Location Map
UPPER PRIOR LAKE
GD
(904)
ARTIC
LAKE
NE
(906.7)
154TH ST NW
H I G H W A Y 1 3
160TH ST SE
PLEASANT ST SE
Upper Prior Lake
SUBJECTPROPERTY
SUBJECTPROPERTY