Loading...
535 Majestic Oaks Ct - Zoning PermitCity o[Eap 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan MN 55122 Phone: (651) 675 -5685 Email: planningacitvofeagan.com L 2011 ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION ✓ Please submit a set of scaled drawings with the application. For Office Use Permit #: /60 562-I Date Received: Site Address: µ�'►' tav _C OF % COOP i Name: Address: 51'S c fY S CR-T` City /State /Zip: EING Msi Ss[23 Applicant Signature: Phone: (p5t - WAD- Igoe O Retaining Wall <4 feet 0 Driveway ,Other: O Patio tI.Sport Court 0 Sidewalk 0 Fence Description of work: TNSIA-L" OF &Mr Cwt.- At4b FEN M. Approved: Required Corrections: Yes / No Date of Approval: Staff: Revised Plans Approved: Yes / No Date of Approval: Staff: Approved: ( cYB,S,A.AIo Date of Approval: % Z I t Required Corrections: -ce inee `is 10' tt eve` �vtwt e v� O - wt. d --4/L12.4.-4.4451 - -6-eta t -�t -,z¢ � - -e ` - 1-0 s 4. a ("4;c4i. , ' e Y vvt vvec3 Revised Plans Approved: Yes / No Date of Approval: Staff: Staff: G: \Building Inspections \PERMIT APPLICATIONS \2011\2011 Permit Applications rn s c › : a 0 0 0 0 a N CD (/) M 0 : a) C 3 E v t6 u) O y +' 41 o to 'v Y a) m - � a) L. o ID C i 1 — . -- 2 cr >. < I-- O DO @0 0 0 00 N 0 0 N z 0 a iu D a) z • 4 u 4 ‘k 3 7 cL c� 6 c „t 4 ao 0 r in O a) N 0 cc 0 0 c! 0 0 Q a- a) a w Cl) m C w a ) x m r- v) 0 U) 0 0 C a cc as . Q Y J � 0 o ° a .0 0 0 Q > a CI. c n 3 c c 0 N 8 � ._ Q v_) 3 H 0 0 0 1 8. E 0 r 0 0 a) 0 a ° o c U 0 C Y Pam Dudziak From: JayMMiklya @eaton.com Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 12:03 PM To: Pam Dudziak Cc: JayMMiklya @eaton.com Subject: RE: Zoning Permit Application - 535 Majestic Oaks Court Jay Pam, I do not think I need to the building permit for a fence. I spoke with the Sport Court rep that would be installing the court. I am opting to just install a ball containment net at the ends of the court. This containment net has removable posts. Based on that information, would I be right to assume that I do not need a permit? Thanks. From: Miklya, Jay M Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 2:37 PM To: Pam Dudziak Cc: Miklya, Jay M Subject: RE: Zoning Permit Application - 535 Majestic Oaks Court Pam, Again, thanks for all the time that you have helped me on this proposal. I have attached a revised zoning application with proposed new plan. Proposal: Based on your calculations below, with the removal of the patio, the lot could support 698 SF of additional impervious coverage. The sport court would be located 40' from Majestic Oaks Ct and 10' from back of property line. Please let me know if this proposal is acceptable. Also, what do I need to provide to receive a building permit for the 10ft fence around the court? Thanks. Jay Miklya • Add a 693 SF sport court (21'x33') • Remove — 120'SF concrete patio that currently exists to be completely removed From: Pam Dudziak [ mailto:pdudziak @cityofeagan.com] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 4:43 PM To: Miklya, Jay M Subject: RE: Zoning Permit Application - 535 Majestic Oaks Court Jay, I have attached a copy of the site survey from the original building permit. This survey shows the house /garage coverage at 2,646 SF, and lot size of 19,382 SF. Absent an updated current survey, this is the most accurate measurements we have to work with. The survey does not include the hardcover of driveway, sidewalk and patio, so I will use your numbers for those items. I'm sorry for the confusion, I thought the shed was existing. HARDCOVER: If you eliminate the shed from the proposal, here's how the numbers line up: Existing hardcover = 4,267 SF (2,647 house /garage + 100 sidewalk + 1,400 driveway + 120 patio) Maximum hardcover = 4,845 SF (25% of 19,382 SF) Thus, the lot can support up to 578 SF of additional impervious coverage. The maximum size the sport court could be is 24' x24' or equivalent. 1 SETBACKS: Sport Court -- The sport court must be set back from the property line along Majestic Oaks Place a minimum of 30'. Note this setback is measured from the property line, not the curb line. I have shown this on the survey. This would put the edge approximately in line with the existing house along that side. Fence — What kind of fence are you proposing -- chain link, wood privacy or something else? Will the fence be located right next to the edge of the sport court, or a few feet outside the edge? At 10' high, a building permit is required for the fence. The fence must also meet required structure setbacks (minimum of 30' from Majestic Oaks Place, and 5' from side and rear lot lines). Thus, the sport court may need to be set back a little further to provide enough space for the fence to also meet setbacks. I will watch for your revised plan. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Pam Dudziak Pamela Dudziak I Planner I City of Eagan City Hall 1 3830 Pilot Knob Road I Eagan, MN 55122 1 651 - 675 -5691 1 651- 675 -5694 (Fax) I pdudziak(ilcitvofeagan.com From: JayMMiklya @eaton.com [mailto:JayMMiklya @eaton.com] Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011.4:34 PM To: Pam Dudziak Cc: JayMMiklya @eaton.com Subject: RE: Zoning Permit Application - 535 Majestic Oaks Court Importance: High Pam, Jay Miklya From: Pam Dudziak [mailto:pdudziak @cityofeagan.com] Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 2:24 PM To: Miklya, Jay M Subject: FW: Zoning Permit Application - 535 Majestic Oaks Court Importance: High Mr. Miklya, 2 City OIEaQa THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND /OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. Thank you for responding and providing me with the below information. I want to clarify some on the information below. The shed does not exist on this property. I was probably not clear on my zoning permit application. I was trying to apply for the sport court (1,500 sq ft) and the shed (120 sq ft). With that being said, am I correct in saying that my current property impervious coverage would be 4,184 SF (reduced by shed that does not exist). That would leave me 661 SF total left for my sport court. In summary, the largest impervious sport court that could be installed on this property would be a 20x33 sport court? Is this correct? If yes, would I submit another request with changed dimensions? I am just trying to figure out my options. Again, thank you for your time. I am in receipt of your zoning permit application for a sport court. Based on the information submitted we are not able to approve it at this time because the proposal would exceed the maximum 25% impervious coverage allowed for your property. • The County records show your lot size as 19,380 SF. I have based my calculations off that number. • Using the numbers you provided, the existing impervious coverage (including the 120 SF shed) is 4,304 SF or 22.21 %. Regards, Pam Dudziak Pamela Dudziak I Planner I City of Eagan City Hall 1 3830 Pilot Knob Road I Eagan, MN 55122 1 651 - 675 -5691 1 651- 675 -5694 (Fax) I pdudziak(cilcityofeagan.com From: JayMMiklya @eaton.com [mailto:JayMMiklya @ eaton.com] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 12:56 PM To: Pam Dudziak; Sarah Thomas Cc: JayMMiklya @eaton.com Subject: Zoning Permit Application - 535 Majestic Oaks Court Importance: High To Whom It May Concern: 3 • With the added 1,500 SF of the proposed sport court, that number goes up to 5,804 SF or a ratio of 29.95 %. The City's Shoreland Zoning Ordinance (Sec. 11.65) limits impervious coverage to a maximum of 25% of the lot area. The Shoreland Ordinance does allow a property owner to request a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to exceed the 25% max. The CUP process requires a public hearing before the Advisory Planning Commission, with the final decision made by the City Council. The process takes approximately 60 days, and for residential uses, $350 application fee and $500 escrow deposit. The application fee is non - refundable and there is no guarantee of approval. Applications for the August public hearing were due earlier this week; the next application due date is August 17 for public hearing on September 27 You inquired about whether the sport court could be installed with a pervious base. We typically do not consider Class 5 to be pervious as it packs down and does not facilitate infiltration of water into the ground. However, we would be willing to have our Engineering staff look at Sport Court's construction details and through the above CUP process, it may be determined that some reduction to the impacted area can be given for such a design. Similar to the pervious installation design for the sport court itself, in past such CUP requests, the City has given consideration to offsetting measures such as replacing an asphalt driveway with a pervious paver system. Credit is not 100 %, more like 50% of the affected area (e.g. 700 SF of offset for replacing a 1,400 SF driveway). Other reductions to impervious coverage such as removal of the existing shed, may also be considered. If such measures provided a 50% offset to the 1,500 SF sport court, that would bring the impervious coverage down to an equivalent of 5,054 SF or a ratio of 26.1 %. While this still exceeds the 25% limit, it is much closer and could make approval of a CUP request more likely. For your information, I have attached a copy of the CUP submittal checklist. Please let me know if you wish to pursue the CUP application. Cit ofEa THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND /OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. I have been in the process of planning the building of a sport court and storage shed at the house that I just purchased last month. To make sure I was compliant with the City codes, I placed a call to my cousin Tom Miklya. He informed me that the City of Eagan has implemented a 2011 Zoning Permit application for the installation of sport courts and storage sheds. I have attached a copy of a completed Zoning Permit application along with drawing and calculations of proposed sport court and storage shed. Tom has informed me that my new property is part of the 25% Shore land district. Based on how I interrupt this district calculations, I believe my proposed sport court and storage shed exceed the available impervious surface that would be allowed on this property. Would you please advise if this is correct? If my proposed sport court and shed are over the acceptable square footage, can a sport court be installed with a impervious surface? Sport Court is the company that will be completing the installation. I have been told they have a surface available that utilizes class 5 foundation with a locking paver foundation that qualifies as a pervious foundation. Would this type of sport court be acceptable as pervious? As Tom mentions below, a sport court put in even with a pervious surface might have certain restrictions. I am looking for some help on what other restrictions might apply. I can be reached on my cell phone at 651 -216- 1808. Thanks for the help. Jay Miklya From: Tom Miklya [mailto:TMiklya @cityofeagan.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 4:07 PM To: Miklya, Jay M Cc: Pam Dudziak Subject: sport court Jay You need to get in touch with one of the City planners on the 25% Shoreland district that you are in. The sport court you want to put in even with the pervious concrete might have certain restrictions that I'm not aware of. You can contact either one. pdudziak @cityofeagan.com 651 - 675 -5691 sthomas@cityofeagan.com 651 - 675 -5696 The two of them have worked on this new Zoning Permit that was just implemented. Tom Miklya I Property Maintenance /Code Enforcement Technician I City of Eagan City Hall 1 3830 Pilot Knob Road 1 Eagan, MN 551221651-675-56981651-675-5694 (Fax) I TMiklvaCa CitvofEauan.Com THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND /OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. 4 City of 6a all * P!OI IDEA * angirtearing Certificate of 953.1 954.4 30.04 951.2 ( 9 15.00 14.007 - 947.9 \ \17 50a ` \ \ a 24 0\� M PROPOSED 'HOUSE \ 955.7' \\p O C. Larson, L.S. Reg. No. 19828 A OT AREA = 19,382 SQ. FT. HOUSE AREA = 2647 SQ. FT. COVERAGE = 13.7 % HOUSE TYPE =2 STORY W.O. s:dewa-'etc toe SSri✓C.0c1 t:4 0 pa \L ?0 940.0 2 0 O- W Q 9,5.5 IU Q eur BENCH MARK TOP OF PIPE ELEV.= 950.22 p v topt Line. Survey for: WENSMANN HOMES 10.64 to tT M 941.0 LAND SURVEYORS • CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS• LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 2 , 4 414/4ZO: L1Z 7 =ug Q1R.r q,4^tFr- x,26?7$S 589'56'37 "W 110.00 AINAGE & UTILITY st ttae SEMENT PER PLAT LiNG 952.3 s 4.'79� 31" \ NOTE: PROPOSED GRADES SHOWN PER GRADING PLAN BY: TRI —LAND NOTE: BUILDING DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE FOR HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL LOCATION OF STRUCTURES ONLY. SEE ARCHITECTUAL PLANS FOR BUILDING AND FOUNDATION DIMENSIONS. NOTE: NO SPECIFIC SOILS INVESTIGA11ON HAS BEEN COMPLETED ON THIS LOT BY THE SURVEYOR. THE SUITABILITY OF SOILS TO SUPPORT THE SPECIFIC HOUSE PROPOSED IS NOT THE RESPONSIBIUTY OF THE SURVEYOR. NOTE: THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT PURPORT TO SHOW EASEMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN ON THE RECORDED PLAT. NOTE: CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY DRIVEWAY DESIGN. NOTE: BEARINGS SHOWN ARE BASED ON AN ASSUMED DATUM WE HEREBY CERTIFY TO WENSMANN HOMES THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND SURVEY OF THE BOUNDARIES OF: LOT 9, BLOCK 1, MAJESTIC OAKS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA IT DOES NOT PURPORT TO SHOW IMPROVEMENTS OR ENCHROACHMENTS, UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION THIS 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2000. SCALE : 1 INCH = 40 FEET Reoseo 6/9/00 - S f GA 100233.00 BAT 2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, MN 55120 (651) 681 -1914 FAX:681 -9488 E - mail: PIONEER@PRESSENTER.COM 625 Highway 10 N.E. Blaine, MN 55434 (612) 783 -1880 FAX:783 -1883 E -mail: PIONEER2@PRESSENTER.COM 535 MAJESTIC OAKS COURT, EAGAN MODEL- WHITNEY 946.2 4 $ ?- 0\SC SIGN BY: 949.2 19.47 = X Oi O �z 8 O C) 956.4 FENC-L 958.1 PROPOSED HOUSE ELEVATION q0.9 956 -7 9 54 LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION• TOP OF BLOCK ELEVATION• GARAGE SLAB ELEVATION: TOB @ LOOKOUT ELEVATION• CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF A ONEER ENGINEERI BENCH MARK - TOP OF PIPE ELEV.=955.43 X 000.00 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION ( 000.00 ) DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION — — — — DENOTES DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT DENOTES DRAINAGE FLOW DIRECTION DENOTES MONUMENT DENOTES OFFSET HUB EXCEPT AS SHOWN, AS SURVEYED BY ME OR