Loading...
1998 12 22CHANHASSEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPPEALS REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 22, 1998 Chairperson Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:15 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Willard Johnson, Carol Watson and Steven Berquist STAFF PRESENT: Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner I A REQUEST FOR A 3 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION, RALPH AND PATRICIA HEGMAN, 3311 SHORE DRIVE. Cynthia Kirchoffpresented the staff report on this item. Berquist asked what the setback is from the drainfield. Kirchoff responded that a error was made on the site plan and that the drainfield does not exist. Ralph Hegrnan stated the variance is required so a larger bedroom can be constructed on the main level. He explained that the garage only maintains a 7 foot setback and the addition will be maintaining that setback and not encroaching any further. Mr. Hegrnan stated the addition will look better on the eastern side and will be easier for them. He indicated that he is willing to work on the erosion control issues. Berquist asked if the proposed addition meets the lakeshore setback. He also questioned what was impeding the addition from being extended towards the lake. Patricia Hegman stated the living room and kitchen are located on that side of the home. Mr. Hegman asked if the Board would like to view pictures of the site. Berquist stated that the hill does not appear to have a 50 percent slope as the staff report states. Kirchoff responded that it does not meet the definition of a bluff. Berquist asked if there is home to the east. Mr. Hegman stated the house has been demolished and is being rebuilt. Berquist commented that the drainfxeld does not exist. Kirchoff responded that it was an error on the architect's part so a setback is not required. Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes December 22, 1998 Page 2 Berquist commented that city water and sewer is available to the site. Mr. Hegman stated the site plan was drawn off an old plat. Berquist stated that he does not want to see the use intensified because it is currently non- conforming. He explained that the side yard setback ensures privacy. He commented that he understands the request, however, he believes the addition should go up or to the lake. He stated he would like to see the addition meet the 10 foot side yard setback. Hegman stated if the addition is reduced to meet the side yard setback it will be a tunnel and will not be feasible. Berquist stated that he is undecided about this variance. Willard Johnson stated that he feels similar and would like to see the addition meet the required side yard setback. He believes there are other alternatives. Carol Watson stated that there is land, but it is not where they would like to place the addition. She explained that she understands their perspective. Berquist asked if the applicant had considered purchasing property from the neighbor to the east. Mr. Hegrnan stated that he has not. Berquist stated that the additional 3 feet would solve the problem. Mr. Hegrnan stated that 3 feet is really trivial. He stated that the neighboring probably will not be subdivided in the future so encroaching into the setback would not be harmful. Berquist stated that it would be mutually beneficial for the applicant to consider purchasing the additional property. Berquist moved, Watson seconded the motion to table the application. All voted in favor and the motion carried. A REQUEST FOR A 7,000 SO. FT. VARIANCE FROM THE 15,000 SO. FT. LOT AREA REQUIREMENT, A 50 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 90 FOOT MINIMUM LOT WIDTH REQUIREMENT, A 5.2 FOOT VARIANCE FROM TIlE NORTH 10 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT, A 7.3 FOOT VARIANCE FROM SOUTH 10 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK REOUIREMENT AND A 1 PERCENT VARIANCE Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes December 22, 1998 Page 3 FROM THE 25 PERCENT MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE REQUIREMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION, JOAN WRIGHT, 6640 LOTUS TRAIL Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Berquist asked why a summary of the approved variances was not included within the report. Kirchoff responded that there are too many variances to set forth a fair comparison. Berquist asked if there were any neighbor comments. Kirchoff responded that a few neighbors had contacted the city upon the receipt of the meeting notice. Joan Wright stated that their only other option was to add a second story and that will increase the cost. She explained how they planned to purchase Lots 643 and 673. Berquist asked if the lots were for sale. Wright stated the owners of the property cannot be found and her attorney is tracing the heirs. Berquist asked if the property is purchased variances will still be required. Wright responded that variances will still be required. Kirchoff stated that the property will have 3 front yards. Johnson asked if the applicant knows the property owner. Wright responded that she does not. Watson stated that the applicant should contact Carver County. Wright stated that after much research not much has been found regarding the property owner. Kirchoff asked if the applicant was contacted by the city about purchasing the lots for public facilities. Wright indicated that the city will need a water easement. Johnson asked if the structure will have to maintain a setback from Napa Drive. Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes December 22, 1998 Page 4 Kirchoff responded that if the city purchases the vacant lots, a from yard will not be required. Watson stated that they will be just encroaching into a vacant lot. Berquist stated that if the property to the south is owned by a private party it will pay taxes. Watson suggested that the Board wait on voting on the variance until the applicant acquires the property. Wright stated that it will be a long process before the owner is found. Berquist suggested that staff contact the city attorney to determine if the property can be conveyed to Ms. Wright. Watson asked how long it will take before the property can be sold. Johnson stated that if no taxes are paid, Carver County can sell the property. Wright stated that the tax forfeiture has been in the process for some time. Wright asked if the addition could be increased in depth and decreased in width. Kirchoff responded that the addition would have to meet all building code requirements. Watson moved, Johnson seconded the motion to table the variance application. All voted in favor and the motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Watson moved, Johnson seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting dated December 1, 1998. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Johnson moved, Watson seconded the motion to adjourn. Ali voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 6:55 p.m. Prepared and Submitted by Cynthia Kirchoff Planner I