Loading...
1998 11 10CHANHASSEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPPEALS REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 1998 Chairperson Johnson called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Willard Johnson, Carol Watson and Steven Bcrquist STAFF PRESENT: Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner I A REQUEST FOR 5 FOOT VARIANCE FROM 7 FOOT BLUFF SETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SCREEN PORCH, EUGENE & MIRIAM JUNKER, 1250 HESS FARM ROAD, CHASKA Cynthia Kerchief presented the staff report on this item. Steve Berquist asked, at the time of building permit, if the home had to maintain only the 50 foot rear yard setback. Kerchief responded that only a 50 foot rear yard setback was required. Carol Watson questioned why the home was not inspected. Kerchief responded that the setbacks were probably not measured. Eugene Junked stated that he has 4.8 acres not 6.8 acres as stated in the staff report. He also stated that the setback was not mentioned at the time of their family room addition. Berquist stated that the architect made notes on the site plan regarding the proposed home location. Mr. Junked stated that the total porch is 120 sq. ft., and the addition is only 4 feet. He confirmed that the porch will be 3 feet from the top of the bluff. Mr. Junked stated that the porch will not be for the view, but for a comfortable environment from the mosquitoes. Berquist asked if the deck was constructed at the same time as the home. Ms. Junked responded that it was, however, it was recently repaired because of deterioration. Berquist asked if the deck was extended any further into the bluff setback. Mr. Junked stated that the steps have changed, however, it is the same configuration as the original 1977 deck. Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes November 10, 1998 Page 2 Berquist explained that the bluff setback intends to protect step inclines from degradation. He questioned if the new deck will create additional erosion. Ms. Junked stated that the are attempting to preserve the bluff by planting trees. She stated that a hard rain did erode the bluff several years ago, however, no further erosion has taken place since that time. Ms. Junked stated that the addition fits in with the existing home. Watson asked if there is another location for the porch. Ms. Junked stated that it is logical to place the porch off the family room or living room. Willard Johnson stated that the porch should not encroach further into the bluff. Berquist stated that additional damage to the bluff will not be caused by the porch addition. Watson stated that the applicant will lose the most if the porch creates additional erosion. Johnson asked if the applicants will plant additional shrubs, if the variance is approved. Ms. Junked responded that they will. Watson moved, Johnson seconded the motion to approve a 5 foot variance from the 7 foot bluff protection setback for the reconstruction and expansion of a deck with the following conditions: 1. The applicant plant additional vegetation to hold the soils. 2. The applicant shall submit a survey with setbacks. Watson asked if the city can require a survey. Kerchief responded that the city can require a survey. Johnson stated that the survey should show the setbacks. Mr. Junked stated that the property comers are in the ravine. Watson stated that the surveyor will fred them. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes November 10, 1998 Page 3 APPEAL AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THAT THEIR RETAIL SALES ARE NOT A PERMITTED USE NOR A GRANDFATHERED RIGHT IN THE RSF, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, RICHARD & YVONNE BROWN, 2630 Kerchief presented the staff report on this item. Tom Eagan, attorney for Mr. & Mrs. Brown, explained the unique history of the property. He stated that the property has had retail sales since the home was built in 1883. Mr. Eagan confirmed that the site was an apple orchard and that raspberries were sold on the property. He indicated that the staff report was extremely deficient because it did not include the history of the property and its 115 years of retail sales. He explained that the property owners have a clear non- conforming use and that the city cannot take away their property rights without compensation. Dean Paxton, 2611 Orchard Lane, stated that he has no problem with the Browns, however, he would like the neighbors to be given more consideration. He explained that the sales were getting larger and asked how the size will be controlled. He stated that the sales have altered the character of the neighborhood by the on-street parking and customers disturbing he and his family at 6 or 7 a.m. Jessica Paxton, 2611 Orchard Lane, expressed concern with the retail sales and the impact it has on the neighborhood. She suggested that the Browns relocate to a business district. Dick Brown stated they have not increased the size of the sales in 5 or 10 years. He stated that customers do not arrive at 6 or 7 a.m.. Julie Chaser, 2161 Orchard Lane, expressed concern about the early morning traffic and asked what will stop additional retail sales. Pat Hanley, 2660 Orchard Lane, stated that he has lived in this neighborhood for 20 years and that the on-street parking is an issue, however, it slows down traffic. He mentioned that the Browns are good neighbors. Tom Christopher, 2540 Orchard Lane, stated that he is not bothered by the parking in front of his home. Don Livingston, 2621 Orchard Lane, stated that they are excellent neighbors and that this sale is similar to a garage sale. Ralph Livingston, 2631 Orchard Lane, stated that the Browns are good neighbors. Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes November 10, 1998 Page 4 Watson moved, Berquist seconded the motion to close the public hearing. Watson stated that this is not an isolated problem and that it is no different from a garage sale. She stated that staff report's definition of a garage sale was insufficient. Ms. Watson explained that this problem is greater than Orchard Lane. Johnson stated that he is concerned with the traffic that will travel Orchard Lane when Sandpiper and Oriole Lane became limited access from Hwy. 7. Mr. Brown stated that traffic has not increased due to the sales. Johnson asked if there were any pauses between the sales of the previous owner and the Browns. Mr. Eagan responded that the sales were continuous. Berquist stated that the neighbors have concerns but things can be worked out. He expressed an understanding with the neighbors. He reiterated that the sales are operated twice per year with each sale extending two weekends. He asked the Browns what was the worst business day. Yvonne Brown responded that it is Friday or Sunday. Berquist stated that the sales can be held on Thursday, Friday and Saturday, not Sunday. Watson asked if the Browns need to call staffprior to the sale. Berquist stated that they should so that staff can observe and document traffic problems. He asked the size of the barn. Ms. Brown stated that the barn is 20 feet by 22 feet. Berquist is they have a circle drive. Ms. Brown stated that they do, but they do not permit customers to park in their driveway. Johnson stated that the Board should permit the sales for one year. Berquist stated that at that time they can review problems and concerns. He stated that he cannot see this as a detriment to the neighborhood. Berquist moved, Watson seconded the motion to allow retail sales at 2630 Orchard Lane with the following conditions: Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes November 10, 1998 Page 5 1. The applicant shall post "No Parking" signs on the south side of Orchard Lane. . The retail sales shall be limited to twice per year, one in the spring and another in the fall. The sales shall be limited to Thursday, Friday and Saturday. Sales shall not take place on Sundays. The applicant shall notify the planning department with the dates of the sales. 3. The retail sales floor area shall not increase. Berquist stated that the permission to operate the retail sales shall expire in one year, after which the Board shall review parking problems associated with the sales. Watson stated that parking is a problem with the park in her neighborhood and that these sales exist all over the city. She reiterated that these craft sales are no difference from garage sales. Berquist stated that there is a difference between retail sales and garage sales. All voted in favor and the motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Johnson moved, Berquist seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting dated September 29, 1998. Watson abstained from the vote and the motion carded. Watson moved, Johnson seconded the motion to adjourn. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Prepared and Submitted by Cynthia Kirchoff Planner I