BOA 1999 03 02 .4 GEND/I
CHANHASSEN ZONING BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 1999, ~:00 P.M.
CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, ~90 CITY CENTER DRIVE
CITY COlfNCIL CHAMBERS
Call to Order
NE W BUSINESS
1. Requests for the following variances for the construction of an addition:
(1) ,4 5.2foot variance from the north property line JO foot side yard setback;
(2) ,4n 7.3 1.2foot variance from the south properly line lO foot side yard setback;
(3) ,~ 1 percent variance from the 25 percent maximum imperv~'ous surface requirement;
(4) ,4 7. 000 sq. fl. variance from the 15, 000 sq. fl. minimum lot size requirement; and
('5) ,4 50foot variance from the 90foot minimum lot width/street frontage requirement
Located at 6640 Lotus Trail (Lots 641, 642, 671 and 672, Carver Beach)~ Joan Wright
2. Approval of Minutes.
~4djoul~men t
CITY OF
BOA DATE: ~
3/2/99
CCDATE:
CASE #: 98- 14 VAR
By: Kirchoff:v
STAFF
REPORT
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
Requests for the following varianc~ for the construction of an addition:
(1) A 5.2 foot variance from the north property line 10 foot side yard setback;
(2) An ~.; 1.2 foot variance from the south property line 10 foot side yard setback;.
(3) A 1 percent variance fi'om the 25 percent maximum impe~ rvious surface requirement;
(4) A 7,000 sq. fh variance from the 15,000 sq. i~. mininmm lot size requirement; and
(5) A 50 foot variance from the 90 foot minimum lot width/street frontage requirement.
6640 Lotus Trail (Lots 641,642, 671 and 672, Carver Beach)
Joan WriSt
6824 Thomas Avenue South
Richfield, MN 55423
(869-5940)
PRESENT ZONING:
ACREAGE:
DENSITY:
ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USES:
WATER AND SEWER:
PHYSICAL CHARACTER:
2000 LAND USE PLAN:
RSF, Single Family Residential
8,000 sq. i~.
N/A
N:
S:
E:
W:
RSF, Single Family Residential
RSF, Single Family Residential
Lotus Lake, Recreational Development Lake
RSF, Single Family Residential
Available to the site
This site is a compilation of 4 lots in Carver Beach. The
prop~ty is within the shorehmd of Lotus Lake but does not
have lake frontage. A small 709 sq. ft. cabin and a detached
garage exists on the site.
Low Density Residential
Wright Variance
February 24, 1999
Page 2
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Section 20-615 (6) (c) states that a 10 foot side yard setback shall be maintained on properties
zoned RSF (Attachment 2)).
Section 20-615 (6) (a) states that a 30 foot front yard setback shall be maintained on properties
zoned RSF (Attachment 2).
Section 20-615 (4) states that the maximum lot coverage for all structures is 25 percent
(Attachment 2).
Section 20-615 (1) states that the minimum lot size is 15,000 sq. ~ for properties zoned RSF
(Attachment 2).
Section 20-615 (2) states that the minimum lot frontage is 90 feet for properties zoned RSF
(Attachment 2).
Section 20-72(a) states that there shall be no expansion, intensification, replacement, structural
change, or relocation of any nonconforming use or nonconforming structure except to lessen or
eliminate the nonconformity (Attachment 3).
Section 20-72(b) states that ifa setback of a dwelling is nonconforming, no additions may be
added to the nonconforming side of the building unless the addition meets setback requirements
{,Attachment 3).
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS UPDATE
On December 22, 1998 the Board of Adjustments and Appeals reviewed this application.
The item was tabled because the applicant proposed to purchase two adjacent lots (643 &
673) to the south. This purchase would increase the setback on the southern property line.
Since the purchase has not taken place, _this report is based upon the setback being a side
yard.
The applicant has resubmitted a plan which maintains the existing side yard setbacks. The
revised addition measures 30 feet by 26.6 feet. It is the same width as the existing cabin.
This report has been revised. All new information is in bold and all outdated information
has been struckthrough.
Wright Variance
February 24, 1999
Page 3
BACKGROUND
Carver Beach was platted in 1927. This is one of the oldest and most unique residential
neighborhoods in the city. The lots are generally 20 feet in width and about 100 feet in depth
(depending on topography and physical features). The lots, although originally intended for
cottages or summer cabins, have been combined to accommodate single family homes with
attached garages. The size and shape of some of the lots, as well as the topography, makes
locating a home or an accessory structure difficult at times. Hence, many variances have been
granted in this area. Many of these variances were for lot area, not setbacks. Without these
variances, the owner could not make a reasonable use of their property.
The subject property consists of four lots and measures 40 feet by 200 feet. The site also abuts
two streets, Mohawk Drive and Lotus Trail. Lotus Trail is unimproved at the intersection with
Napa Drive. It is actually a "paper street" when it abuts Lots 671-72. However, it is still public
fight-of-way, so a 30 foot front yard setback must be maintained. The property does not actually
abut Napa Drive because two lots are present between the subject property and the bituminous
surface. A 591 square foot detached garage along with a 709 square foot one-story cabin occupy
the site. The existing home and garage do not meet the required side yard setbacks. It meets the
front yard setbacks on Mohawk Drive and Lotus Trail.
The applicant is proposing a 798 square foot addition to the existing structure. This addition
includes a new kitchen, master bedroom, a second bedroom and deck on the so,athem western
portion of the home. The addition is proposed to maintain the northern side yard setback and
encmac~ 5c,,~,er into the southern side yard setback. The addition will be located between the
existing garage and home.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is requesting five variances: a 5.2 foot side yard setback variance on the north, an
7.2 1.4 foot side yard variance on the south, a 1 percent max/mum impervious surface variance, a
7,000 sq. ft. minimum lot area variance and a 50 foot minimum lot width variance. The
proposed addition will double the size of the home and increase the non-conformity of the
structure and the setbacks on the side yards.
Northern Side Yard Setback Variance
According to the survey, the proposed addition maintains the existing 4.8 foot side yard setback
from the north property line. The zoning ordinance requires a 10 foot side yard setback, so the
variance request is for 5.2 feet. Since the property is only 40 feet in width and the setbacks are
10 feet on each side, only 20 feet remains for a home. Staff supports this variance request
because the buildable area is limited and it maintains the existing setback. The addition will not
encroach any further into the setback, although the addition is expanding the length of the
Wright Variance
February 24, 1999
Page 4
home so it is technically increasing the non-conformity. The ordinance does not permit non-
conformities to be increased. However, staff believes that this variance request is reasonable
because the existing home is so small.
Southern Side Yard Setback Variance
The existing residence maintains a 8.6 foot setback from the southern property line. Again, the
zoning ordinance requires a 1 0 foot setback..,~....-.....t.v.~.~..""'":"""* -..; ...... v....v.....-.~:"" "~ ...... ..._...........~*' 6 raddidon~
;,., ,~,-, ta4~l~t~,-~ tA I~ ........ 1~I~ ,~,.,,.1 .... ;~.+,~.,+ ,,+,,4~K ..... 1,1 ...... ,-I
..... :..,.,,.,., ! Aofl ....... ~.~,+ ......... ~ ~-' +"'" ""'":"""+ The revised plan indicates the
addition will maintain the existing setback.
The applicant is also proposing to construct a 6-~ deck adjacent to Napa-l~4ve Lotus
·
Trail on the existing structure. 21~e ........ '~; ....... ;+...~.~t.o + ....... *' 5 *"'~+ :"+"
.... :*-,~ ~',~--.,-~' The deck meets all required setbacks,
Maximum Impervious Surface Variance
The proposed addition will increase the impervious surface to 26 percent based on staff's
calculations If
~:,~ ~ ,~~.~ ,h~ ~ .... ~"~ ~ ..... ~"*~ S~ ~e home ~d ~e prope~ ~e
both smalh it is not ~ffieflt to ex~ m~um ~pe~ous surface for ~e flt~
addition malagas e~flng setbae~ B~ed on thk infomaflo~ s~ r~ommends
approval of thh vaflanc~
Lot Area and Width Variances
Staff is requiring variances from the minirmun lot area and width requirements to make the
property legal. This approval cannot be done administratively because the existing conditions are
not 75 percent of the existing requirements. Staff supports both of these variances.
Wright Variance
February 24, 1999
Page 5
,.,.,.~.,..,.~,.. ......... ~.n.~.;....~......~.~...;~ ~...~""* present. A hardship occurs when the owner does not have a reasonable
use of the property. A reasonable use is defined as the use made by a majority of comparable
property within 500 feet· A "use" can be defined as "the purpose or activity for which land or
buildings are designed, arranged or intended or for which land or buildings are occupied or
maintained." In this case, because it is in a RSF zoning district, a reasonable use is a single
family home.
Staff believes that the applicant does have a hardship in that the width of the contiguous lots only
total 40 feet. Based on the size of the existing cabin, an addition is probably warranted: and
~ existing setbacks should be maintained. Staff recommends ,~.n,~__~
~;~._~.~-'ar~ ~v~., ". ~'~.~ ..... '~ **' ..... **'~-- ~ ~ ~"'~*.... ~.~;~ ..... ~ ~--~, ., -'--~ .... that all variances
· '~/ v ~k& IM. J.&J. L%i/U& OJ.*~l,v JI.,b.l.n~, OtM'LUL,4,1kfJ,"d,. VI.&LL/M,J.J. VV
FINDINGS
The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a
variance unless they find the following facts:
b.
That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship. Undue
hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size,
physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a
majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to
allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that them are pre-existing standards in
this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pm-existing standards without departing
downward from them meet this criteria·
Finding: A reasonable use of this property is a single family home. Currently, a small
cabin exists on the site and the applicant would like to double the living space. This addition
is not unreasonable, however, this addition should be located within the existing setbacks.
It is assumed that these setbacks have existed on this property prior to the adoption of the
zoning ordinance c,~,~.~: ..... ,~,.~ ...." ^ ~ .... ~' * ............. '- ' ~ ~'~ d~c~ ~ ......... '~
~--.. .. ~:~*:~' ~*~-~-~. .~2:c :* ...... ~-~ .' ~--. *~'~... ....... ~ .. ~-~"' "~'**'~ ~*~'~*"'~._ . The
revised plans indi~tes that the addition ~ maintain the existing setbacks.
The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to
other property within the same zoning classification.
Finding: The setback requirements are applicable to all other properties in the RSF zoning
district.
Wright Variance
February 24, 1999
Page 6
C.
The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income
potential of the parcel of land.
Finding: Although this addition will significantly increase the value of the property, staff
does not believe that this is the sole purpose of the application. Many other properties in
Carver Beach expanded original cabins into larger single family homes for year round
occupancy.
d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship.
Fi dig Staffbeli that ..... li:
;o a o,,~; ,....~.,,,,a u,,..~..u;., Hewers, the variances required so the addition maintains the
existing setbacks are not self-created since the setbacks where in place prior to the zoning
ordinance adoption.
e.
The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located.
· -.;n-rl;~nnflt'l ..... !1,~- ,-.,~-T,n,-,1.- +i.,,,,, ;,~ ~" .... A 1,., ,-,+1.,~,- ,.,-,.~,.,,~.~,~., ;,, +1.,,~ O~l~' ,.1; ,w.,-; ,-,+
p..,,~:,, .~h, ,,c ...... The granting of the variances will not be detrlmen~ to the public
welfare or injurious to other land or Improvements In the neighborhood.
The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger
of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values
within the neighborhood.
Fi dig Th 8 - ..... ariances ould permit
.,,.,,1;,, .~ ~.,.+ ,,~, .... adjacent properties than would be
structure to be located closer to a r ...... e~ ......J
typically found in the RSF zoning district, however, It is assumed that the existing
setbacks were established prior to the adoption of a zoning ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals adopt the following motion:
"The Board of Adjustments and Appeals approves a 5.2 foot variance from the 10 foot northern
property line side yard setback, a 1.4 foot variance from the 10 foot southern property line side yard,
a 1 percent variance from the 25 percent maximum .impervious surface coverage
requirement, 7,000 sq. ft. variance from the 15,000 sq. fL minimum lot area requirement and a 50
Wright Variance
February 24, 1999
Page 7
foot variance from the 90 foot minimum lot frontage requirement for an addition based upon the
findings presented in the staff report."
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application
2. Section 20-615, RSF Zoning Requirements
3. Section 20-72, Nonconforming Uses and Structures
.,..,.~ , .. t....~.... Revised Site Plan
4. Sur;ey .~,~ ProposedLTae~I
5. Minutes from December 22, 1998 Meeting
6. Property Owners
g: ~plamek~ma\wright 98-14 var.dot
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937-1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPUCATION
·
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
C~a:litional Use Permit
interim Use Permit
Non-conforming Use Permit
Planned Unit Development*
Re.zoning
· Sign Permits
Sign Plan Review
Site Plan Review'
· Temporary Sales Permit
Vacation of ROW/Easements
, ·
Wetland Alteration Permit
Zoning Appeal
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Notification Sign
X Escroju,,f0r Filing Fees/Attomey Cost**
~5Q/CU P/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes
. ~ Bounds, $4.00 Minor SUB)13e
TOTAL FEE $ "7l~'O~
A fist of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be Included with the
application.
Building materlal samples must be submitted with site plan reviews.
'Twenty-six full slze folded copies of the plans must be submitted, Including an 8½" X 11" reduced copy of
transparency for each plan sheet.
'* Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract
~If3Ti= - Wh~.n multiole aoolications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
ND'rE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
PROJECT NAME
:LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PP, ESENT ZONING
:REQUESTED ZONING
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and rnu~st be a~omp'anied b~, all Ir~ormation
and plans required by applicable C117 Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should, confer with the
P~anning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
·
This is 1o certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible fo/' complying
with all City requirements with regard to this request· This application should be processed In my name and I am the party
whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of
ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificale of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the
~rtzed person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
! w'lll keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed w~th the study. The documents and Information i have submitted are true and correct to the best
~ n'!.y knowledge.
1 al~o understand that after the approval or granting of the permft, such permlts shall be Invalid unless they are recorded
against the title to the property for which the approvaVpermlt is granted withln 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's
Dffice~ the original document returned to City Hall Records. .
Signa~r~ of Applicant .... Date
xp,,.u:a ,,n,ece,¥eoon.!O..[ lClfS.. Fee Paid~"TY~.C~) Receipt ,o. ,~~V
The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the
Tuesday, December 1, 1998
ctW of Chanhassen
Board of Adjustments and Appeals
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Board:
I am applying for a variance to the property at 6640 Lotus Trail to put an
addition onto the existing home. At present this home is a one bedroom log cabin. !
would like to put on an addition to make it two bedrooms with extra living space, plus
new kitchen and a utility room so the furnace can be moved Rom under the house. Once
this is completed then my husband and I would move out there to live on a fun time
bases.
Please see the enclosed plot and plans for the addition. As you may or may not
know I am also in the process via my attorney Margaret Grathwol Bernadi of obtaining
ownership of the strip of land Lot 643 and 673 which appears at this time to belong to no
one. We have been maintaining these lots and driving across them since 1937.
Depending on the result of this acquisition, the addition will be either 2.6 feet Rom the
property line on the Napa Drive side or 22.6 feet. The ex].~ting home Ront is already ~.8
feet from the front road which is Lotus TraiL The addition is also planned to fit within
the space of the two existing buildings already on the property. The literal enforcement
of the existing Chapter would cause undue hardship as the property c~nnot be put to
reasonable use beause of its size. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of
comparable property within five hundred (5OO) feet of it. The proposed variance will not
be detrimental to the pubnc wel~re or injurious to other land in the neighborhood, nor
will it impair an adquate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially
demt.~h or impair property values within the neighborhood.
I am willing to pay for the city to obtain the v_~mes and addresses of the property
owners within SOO feet of the property boundaries~ I hope we can get this variance in a
timely manner so that we can begin building as soon as weather permits. Any further
information I can give you, please don't hesitate to contact me by phone as noted on the
enclosed application.
Thank you for your time and consideration of this m~tter.
ZONING § 20-615
(2) Storage building.
(3) Swimming pool.
(4) Tennis court.
(5) Signs.
(6) Home occupations.
(7) One (l) dock.
(8) Private kennel.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5-3), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-614. Conditional uses.
The following are conditional uses in an "RSF" District:
(1) Churches.
(2) Reserved.
(3) Recreational beach lots.
(4) Towers as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5.4), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 120, § 4(4), 2.12-90; Ord. No. 259, § 12,
11-12-96)
State law referenc~Conditional uses, M.S. § 462.3595.
Sec. 20-615. Lot requirements and setbacks.
The following minimum requirements shall be observed in an "RSF" District subject to
additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in this chapter and chapter 18:
(1)
The minimum lot area is fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet. For neck or flag lots,
the lot area requirements shall be met after the area contained within the "neck" has
been excluded from consideration.
(2)
The minimum lot frontage is ninety (90) feet, except that lots fronting on a cul-de-sac
"bubble" or along the outside curve of curvilinear street sections shall be ninety (90)
feet in width at the building setback line. The location of this lot is conceptually
Supp. Na 9 1211
§ 20-615
illustrated below.
CHANHA~EN CITY CODE
Lotl Where Frontage la
Measured At 8etbaok Line
L
(2)
The minimum lot depth is one hundred twenty-five (125) feet. The location of these lots
is conceptually illustrated below. Lot width on neck or flag lots and lots accessed by
private driveways shall be one hundred (100) feet as measured at the front buil&ing
setback line.
Neck I Flag Lots
Fron Lot Line
I/ (4)
100#Lot Width
,* i I I
I I I I ·
~1 II I
I Ie'~mm I
~ I' I I
L._._I_..j
The maximum lot coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is twenty-five (25)
percent.
The setbacks are as follows:
a. For front yards, thirty (30) feet.
b. For rear yards, thirty (30) feet.
Supp. No. 9 1212
ZONING § 20-682
(6)
c. For side yards, ten (10) feet.
The setbacks for lots served by private driveways and/or neck lots are as ~ollows:
a. For front yard, thirty (30) feet. The front yard shall be the lot line nearest the
public right-of-way that provides access to the parcel. The rear yard lot line is to
be located opposite from the front lot line with the remaining exposures treated
as side lot lines. On neck lots the front yard setback shall be measured at the
point nearest the front lot line where the lot achieves a one-hundred-foot
minimum width.
b. For rear yards, thirty (30) feet.
c. For side yards, ten (10) feet.
(7) The maximum height is as follows:
a. For the principal structure, three (3) stories/forty (40) feet.
b. For accessory structures, twenty (20) feet.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5-5), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 90, § 1, 3-14-88; Ord. No. 127, § 3, 3-26-90;
Ord. No. 145, § 2, 4-8-91; Ord. No. 240, § 18, 7-24-95)
Editor's note--Sect/on 2 of Ord. No. 145 purported to amend § 20-615(6)b. pertaining to
accessory structures; such provision were contained in § 20-615(7)b., subsequent to amend-
ment of the section by Ord. No. 127. Hence, the provisions of Ord. No. 145, § 2, were included
as amending § 20-615(7)b.
Sec. 20-616. Interim uses.
The following are interim uses in the "RSF" District:
(1) Private stables subject to provisions of chapter 5, article IV.
(2) Commercial stables with a minimum lot size of five (5) acres.
(Ord. No. 120, § 3, 2-12-90)
Secs. 20-617--20-630. Reserved.
ARTICLE XIII, '~R-4" MIXED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Sec. 20-631. Intent.
The intent of the "R-4" District is to provide for sin§le-family and attached residential
development at a maximum net density of four (4) dwelling units per acre.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 6(5-6-1), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-632. Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in an "R-4" District:
(1) Single-family dwellings.
(2~ Two-family dwellings.
Supp. No. 9 1213
§ 20-60
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
Variances may be deemed by the board of adjustments and appeals and the council, and
such denial shall constitute a finding and determination that the conditions required for
approval do not exist.
{Ord. No. 80, Art. IH, § 1(3-1-4(6)), 12-15.86)
Secs. 20..61--20-70. Reserved,
DIVISION 4. NONCONFORMING USES*
Sec. 20-T1. Purpose.
The purpose of_this division is:
(1) To recognize the existence of uses, lots, and structures which were lawful when
established, but which no longer meet all ordinance requirements;
(2) To prevent the enlargement, expansion, intensification, or extension of any noncon-
forming use, buil~li~g, or structure;
(3) To encourage the elimination of nonconforming uses, lots, and structures or reduce
their impact on adjacent properties.
{Ord. No. 165, § 2, 2-10-92)
Sec. 20.~2. Nonconforming uses and structures.
(a) There shall be no expansion, intensification, replacement, structural change, or relo-
cation of any nonconforming use or noncmtfo~g structure except to lessen or eliminate the
fo) Notwithstanrli-g any other provisions of this chapter, any detached single-family
dwelling that is on a nonconformb~_~ lot or that is a nonconforming use or structure may be
altered, or expanded provided, however, that the nonconformity may not be increased. If a
setback of a dwelling is nonconformi~, no additions may be added to the nonconforming side
~' the building unless the addition meets setback requirement~
(c) No nonconform~n_= use sh~!l be resumed if normal operation of the use has been
~tisconfinued for a period of twelve (12) or moro monthS. Time shall be calculated as beginning
on the day following the last da~ in which the use was in normal operation and shall run
continuously thereafter. Following the expiration of tvhdve (12) months, only land uses which
are permitted by this ordinance shall be allowed to be established.
*Editor's note-Section 2 of Ord. No. 165, adopted Feb. 10, 1992, Amended Div. 4 in its
entirety to read as set out in §§ 20.71-20-73. Prior to Amendment, Div. 4 contained §§
20-71-20.78, which pertained to similar subject matter and derived from Ord. No. 80, Art. III,
§ 5, adopted Dec. 15, 1986; and Ord. No. 163, § 1, adopted Feb. 24, 1992.
l~Na 4
1164
ZONING § 20-73
(d) Full use of a nonconforming land use shall not be resumed if the amount of land or
floor area dedicated to the use is lessened or it' the intensity of the use is in any manner
diminished for a period of twelve (12) or more months. Time shall be calculated as beginning
(m the day following the last day in which the nonconforming land use was in full operation
and shall run continuously thereafter.. Following the expiration of twelve (12) months, the
nonconforming land use may be used only in the manner or to the extent used during the
preceding twelve (12) months. For the purposes of this section, intensity of use shall be mea.
sure/by hours of operation, traffic, noise, exterior storage, signs, odors, number of employees,
and other factois deemed relevant by the city.
re) Maintenance and repair of nonconforming structures is permitted. Removal or destruc.
t/on of a nonconforming structure to the extent of' more than fifty (50) percent o£ its estimated
value, excluding land value and as determined by the city, shall terminate the right to con-
finue the nonconforming structure.
(f) Notwithstanding the prohibitions contained in the forgoing paragraphs of' this section,
if approved by the city council a nonconforming land use may be changed to another noncon-
forming l-~d use of less/ntensity if it is in the public interest. In all instances the applicant
has the burden of' proof re~rding the relative intensities of' uses.
(~ If a nonconforming land use is superseded or replaced by a permitted use, the non-
conforming status of the premises and any rights which arise under the provisions of this
section shall terminate.
(Or& No. 165, § 2, 2-10-92)
See. 20-73. Nonconforming lots of record.
ia) No variance shall be required to reconstruct a detached single-family dwelling located
on a nonconforming lot of record or which is a nonconforming use if it is destroyed by natural
disaster so long as the replacement dwelling has a footprint which is no lar~er than that of` the
destroyed structure and is substantially the same size in building height and floor area as the
destroyed structure. Reconstruction shall commence within two (2) years of the date of the
destru~on of the original building and reasonable progress shall be made in completing the
project. A building permit shall be obtained prior to construct/on of the new dwelling and the
~ew st.~ucture shall be constructed in compliance with all other city codes and regulations.
(b) No variance shall be required to construct a detached single-family dwelling on a
x~onconforming lot provided that it fronts on a public street or approved private street and
provided that the width and area measurements are at lest seventy-five (75) percent of the
minimum requirements of this chapter.
(c) Except as otherwise specifically provided for detached single-family dwellings, 'there
shall be no expansion, intensification, replacement, or structural changes of a structure on a
~onconform~,~g lot.
·
(cl) If` two (2) or more contiguous lots are in single ownership and if all or part of the lots
~]o not meet the width and area requirements of this chapter for lots in the district, the
1165
o .
·
§ 20-78
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
contiguous lots ~ be conddered to be an undivided parcel for the purpose of this chapter.
If part of the parcel f~ ~old, the sale shall constitute a self-created hardship under the variance
provieione of tMs chap~.
(Or,/. No. 165, § 2. ~.10~92)
Sec~. 20.?~-20-90. Re~rve~
DIVISION 5. BUILDING PERMITS, CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY, ETC.
Sec. 20-91. Building permits.
(a) No person shall erect, construct, alter, enlarge, repair, move or remove, any building
or structure or part thereof without first securing a building permit.
(b) An application for a building permit' shall be made to the city on a form furnished by
the city. All building permit applications shall be accompanied by a site plan drawn to scale
showing the dimensions of the lot to be built upon and the size and location of any existing
structures and the building to be erected, off. street parking and loading facilities and such
other information as may be deemed necessary by the city to determine compliance with this
chapter and other land use ordinances. No building permit shall be issued for activity in
conflict with the provisions of this chapter. The city shall issue a building permit only after
determining that the application and plans comply with the provisions of this chapter, the
uniform building code as adopted and amended by the city and other applicable laws and
ordinances.
(c) If the work described in any building permit is not begun within ninety (90) days or
substantially completed within one (1) year following the date of the issuance thereof, said
permit may become void at the discretion of the zoning administrator upon submission of
documented evidence. Written notice thereof shall be transmitted by the city to permit holder,
stating that activity authorized by the expired permit shall cease unless and until a new
building permit has been obtained.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. IH, § 4(3-14), 12-15~6)
Cross reference--Technical codes, § 7-16 et seq.
Sec. 20-92. Certificates of occupancy.
(a) In accordance with the Uniform Building Code as adopted and amended by the city, a
certificate of occupancy shall be obtained before:
(1) Any nonagricultural building, except an accessory building, hereafter erected or
structurally altered is occupied or used; and
(2) The use Of any existing nonagricultural building, except an accessory building, is
changed.
(b) Application for a certificate of occupancy shall be made to the city as part of the
application for a building permit. A certificate of occupancy shall be issued by the city
Supp. N~ 4
1166
_
... ~.~~~- ~~.~ .' .....,.:...:....
~c~/~/' ~,, ~ ~ '~'~ ~. '-'..,:
. . ,
:
... ... ~~~, ~~, ~~~~ .... '. .
. ~ , · . . :: ... ,: . .
~' ~.~ ':~ ; . ,' , ...,.~.
. .
; .. .- .. .-... · ~:::~
SITE "
REVISED '
........
....
. ':~.~ : .-~ . 2 '...:'~2~
". ~ ' "· · :~ .' '.':':~[r
. · ~ '.~ . .,.,..'.~ '
'.j;.;:,.:. ..' ' .-~2
,..
. .¢~.~.. ...... . .......
.. '.'i '?'' '~"'~" ~'' "i ' ~a~ ~'
' ' ": }' i. : '.-,- , . ?,..., ~.~,~
.
~ ~. i ~' .~ .-.-'" ..-..:..:'.
· ~, ~ .. ~, ~~. .~ .."
,~ · ~.. ,.:;'., '~ ~ . . .
' ~ .i-~ ~v ~t/,:'~! '' L~-~.,' - ~/~ ~ ' ..I
/ ~ ~ ~--~--/~ · , " ., ·~ ~"~ ~.'~./. .
i
~~ '~ ~,. -;'. .. .
' ~ ~: ~ .._ ~". .~!.:~." '
~ ~ ~~.~'.' ....
.. .
~ ~ I h, er~by, ~rtify that Ihis is a true and correct representation of
~ ~M~IL~-H~N~EN~ IN~. th~ ..... I~u~darie~,~l Ih~, above de~ribed land and of the location of all buildings, ~.
., ~kl~ ~n~, MN 5~0 Minnatonk., MN 5~43 - '. . .
6121~-~ 6121938-5678 · _ ~.'
....... _ , ..... ~__~. ~,t~0:._~-?_~, ~oo~.~,~..~:.~__~,~,
.
.
. .
. -
.-
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 ~y 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.
Hegrnan 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. Hegman stated that he has not.
Berquist stated that the additional 3 feet would solve the problem.
Mr. Hegman stated that 3 feet is really trivial. He stated that the neighboring probably will not
be subdivided in the furore so encroaching into the setback would not be harmfifl.
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 SQ. FT. VARIANCE FROM Tl~ 15~000 SQ. FT. LOT AREA
REQUIREMENT~ A 50 FOOT VARIANCE FROM Tl~ 90 FOOT MINIMUM LOT
WIDTH REQUIREMENT~ A 5.2 FOOT VARIANCE FROM ~ NORTH 10 FOOT
SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT~ A 7.3 FOOT VARIANCE FROM SOUTI~ 10
FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND A 1 PERCENT VARIANCE.
Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes
December 22, 1998
Page 3
FROM TIlE 25 PERCENT MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE REQUIREMENT
FOR TIlE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION~ JOAN WRIGHT~ 6640 LOTUS TRAIl,
Kirchoffpresented 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 front 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. All voted in favor and the motion
The meeting was adjourned at 6:55 p.m.
Prepared and Submitted by C~thia Kirchoff
Planner I
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
Tuesday, December 22, 1998
at 6:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
690 City Center Drive
6640 Lotus Trail
Lotus
Lake
PROJECT: Front and Side Yard Setback Variance
APJ=UCANT: Joan Wright
LOCATION: 6640 Lotus Trail
NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area.
.-/'he applicant, Joan Wright, is requesting a front and side yard setback variance for the construction
Df an addition, on property zoned RSF and located 6640 Lotus Trail.
What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the
applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting,
the Board of Adjustments Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps:
1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.
2_ The applicant will present plans on the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is closed and the Board discusses project. The Board will then make a decision.
Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City
Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to
someone about this project, please contact Cindy at 937-1900 ext. 117. If you choose to submit
written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting.
Staff will provide copies to the Commission.
Notice of this public hearing has been published In the Chanhassen Villager on December 10, 1998.
.~Ai~ ~yE~-TETAX SPECIALIST
ROAD
55155-4030
ANN HOGAN & M. IMMERMAN
481 BIGHORN DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
FRED OELSCHLAGER
7410 CHANHASSEN ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
KEt~ON D. KELI.Y
6539 GRAY FOX CURVE
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
DON MEHL
490 BIGHORN DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CAROLYN WETTERLIN
7420 CHANHASSEN ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
RICHAR~ & KATHLEEN DENMAN
6661 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHAS~N. MN 55317
LEONARD mSKIS
491 BIGHORN DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
IRVING RAYMOND
7440 CHANHASSEN ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
:SUNRISE HILLS
~30 BOX 184
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
DEAN STANTON
510 BIGHORN DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
TIMOTHY MCHUGH
7450 CHANHASSEN ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
dOHN & JANE THIELEN
· ~65 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
C~NHASSF_N, MN 55317
GUY SWANSON
610 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
HARVEY PARKER
7480 CHANHASSEN ROAD '
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JOSEPH J. SMITH
224 WILSON ST W
PO BOX 21~1
NORWOOD, MN 55368
PAUL & KARl ROMPORTL
620 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JEFF BORNS
7490 CHANHASSEN ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 5,5317
'NEAR MOUNTAIN LAKE ASSOC
~330 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JOHN HAGEDORN
630 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
LOUIS TESLER
7500 CHANHASSEN ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
GARY/CYNTHIA SCHNEIDER
640 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHAS..~EN, MN 55317
JOHN LANG
640 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
GREGORY LINDSLEY
7510 CHANHASSEN ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
LARRY A KOC~
471 BIGHORN DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CONSTANCE CERVILLA
650 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
LARRY MON
P.O. BOX 39553
EDINA, MN 55439
-tHOMAS jONES
480 BIGHORN DRIVE
.G~U~NHASSE~ MN 55317
HENRY SOSIN
7400 CHANHASSEN ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MARK ENGASSER
7000 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
-~NIS FLAHER37
70134 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CAROLYN BLOOMBERG
7008 DAKOTA
CHANHASSF_N, MN 55317
STEVEN POSNICK
3400 DAKOTA AVENUE
~T. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416
HENRY. N~LS
7012 DAKOTA
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
FRANK HETMAN JR.
7014 DAKOTA CIRCLE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
EVAN I~IIEFELD
7016 DAKOTA CIRCLE
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
MICHAEL HEER
2155 W. MARCH LANE
sUrrE 10
STOCKTON. CA 952O7
ANDREW CLEMENS
6B87 DEERWOOD DRIVE
CHANHAS~N, MN 55317
Kt.EWERS PT HOMEOWNERS
A'['rN: TANYA GLA'I-rLE¥
21 t~ASSWOOD DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
I~N:D~EW A HISb'-'OX
7506 ERIE AVENUE
~HANHASSEN, MN 55317
DUSTYN BOSWELL
7501 ERIE AVENUE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JACKIE HAMME'Fr
7506 ERIE AVENUE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ROBERT AMICK
581 FOX HILL DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
DAVID SANFORD
6440 FOX PATH
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
TOM HUBERTY
6450 FOX PATH
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MICHAEL HAYDOCK
6460 FOX PATH
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
KEITH M. HOFFMAN
6470 FOX PATH
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
JEFFREY & LYNN PORRITT
6510 FOX PATH
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
ZACHARY DEVELOPMENT
7201 METRO BLVD.
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55439
TOM & CHERYL EBENREITER
6530 FOX PATH
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
GREGORY CRAY
200 FRONTIER COURT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
WILLIAM KIRKVOLD
201 FRONTIER COURT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
PETER J DAHL
220 FRONTIER COURT
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
LAURA MUELLER
7199 FRONTIER TRAIL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
ROLF G. ENGSTROM
7201 FRONTIER TRAIL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
PAT & KATHY PAVELKO
7203 FRONTIER TRAIL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
SHIRLEY NAVRATIL
7337 FRONTIER TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ARLIS BOVY
7339 FRONTIER TRAIL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
BOB GREELEY
7341 FRONTIER TRAIL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
ROBERT H HORSTMAN
7343 FRONTIER TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
'I3EORC.-,E PRIEDmS
R TRAIL
· MN 55317
JOHN & DONNELLA SEGNER
30 HILL STREET
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
DOUG & BETH BITNEY
6645 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
LORN~ ASta..ING
PO BOX 382
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JOHN MELBY
40 HILL STREET
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
FRANK KUZMA
6651 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
'BLAIR & NANCY ENTENMANN
7407 FRONTIER TRAIL
CI..IANNASSEN. MN 55317
RON HARVIEUX
6605 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
EVELYN ALBINSON
6655 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
.'ROBERT SOMERS
7409 FRONTIER TRAIL
-CHAN~SEN, MN 5.5317
JOHN DANIELSON
6607 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
RICHARD & KATHLEEN DENMAN
6661 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
TOM-HAROLD
7411 FRONTIER TRAIL
..CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
RAYMOND BROZOVICH
6609 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
YORIKO PRICE
6663 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ROGER KARJALAHTI
7413 FRONTIER TRAIL
'CHANHASSEN, MN 5.5317
THOMAS GILMAN
6613 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
JOHN CUNNINGHAM
6665 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
:MICHELE KOPFMANN/RICHARD GILLEAPIE
7415 FRONTIER TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JAMES KEIPER
6615 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
DAVID KOPISCHKE
6675 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JOHN & KRISTi SESTAK
7417 FRONTIER TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
LADD R CONRAD
6625 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
DORIS ROCKWELL
6677 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
FRONT1ER TRAIL ASSOC
C,/O MRS. WILLIAM KIRKVOLD
2.01 FRONTIER COURT
CHANHASSEN, MN .55317
HAROLD & KATHRYN DAHL
6631 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
JEFF & JUDI KVILHAUG
6681 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
: t-II~EN
20 HILL STREET
'CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
PHILIP ISAACSON
6633 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
JOHN RYAN
6685 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
I-P=f ~ HARTMANN
6687 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANI~SSEN, MN 55317
SANDP~ OLSON
6691 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHARLES C. HURD
6695 HORSESHOE CURVE
Ct.-~NHASSEN, MN 55317
JOHN HAMMETT
6697 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55357
ALAN KRAMER
531 INDIAN HILL ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
~-RANK KURVERS
7220 KURVERS POINT ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
-MELVIN KURVERS
7240 KURVERS POINT ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
DOUG MA~I_EAI~!
7280 KURVERS POINT ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
DANNY & BRENDA YATLAND
7290 KURVERS POINT ROAD
CHANHASSEhl, MN 55317
GERA]_~ & JANICE STRAND
18909 KINGWOOD TERRACE
MINNETONKA, MN 55345
JEFF VanTHOURNOUT
7320 KURVERS POINT ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
SUSAN HENDERSON
7330 KURVERS POINT ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
RONALD HAINES
7340 KURVERS POINT ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHARLES APPLEGATE
7350 KURVERS POINT ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
SUSAN & ALLEN APPLEGATE
7360 KURVERS POINT ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
SEYMOUR & SANDRA RESNIK
7370 KURVERS POINT ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHARLES & JUDY PETERSON
708 LAKE POINT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
RALPH & JANICE MEYER
716 LAKE POINT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ALAN LAWRENCE
724 LAKE POINT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
TERRY VOGT
732 LAKE POINT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
TODD D & SUSAN L ERICKSON ELFTMANN
740 LAKE POINT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
GREG HEDLUND
748 LAKE POINT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
GREG HEDLUND
748 LAKE POINT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JERRY KRIESLER
764 LAKE POINT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
NED TABAT
772 LAKE POINT
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MICHAEL POSTON
780 LAKE POINT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
ROBERT J. DORAN
788 LAKE POINT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
A.J. FOX
7300 LAREDO DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
RICHARD & EUNICE PETERS
7301 LAREDO DRIVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
STUART BAIRD
7303 LAREDO DRIVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
~ SDHROEDER
LHAssOTUS TRAIL
EN, MN 55317
WILLIAM BENSON
6630 LOTUS TRAIL
· CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JOAN WRIGHT / MERMON TOCK
6824 THOMAS AVE S.
RICHFJF' n, MN 55423
MARTHA NYGREN
6650 LOTUS TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHRIS/CYNTHIA ANDERSON
.6680 LOTUS TRAIL
~HANHASSEN, MN 55317
~tJRIS ANDERSON
6680 LOTUS TRAIL
· CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
PAULA VELTKAMP
6724 LOTUS TRAIL
~HANHASSEN, MN 55317
ERIC ~
6610 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MICHAEL WEGLER
6630 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
lSAACSON
-6640 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
AARON & MEGAN GORDON
6650 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
KEITH GUNDERSON
6661 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
DAVID G HOLUB
6670 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
DONALD SENNES
6680 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
PETER LUSTIG
6699 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
DONALD SENNES
6680 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN MN 5,5317
ROBERT SATHRE
365 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANAHSSEN. MN 55317
RANDY SMFrH
429 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
DONN ANDRUS
449 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
TODD ADAMS
469 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ROBERT L POST
489 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
CURTIS ANDERSON
500 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
JOHN R VON WALTER
510 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
DOUG & LANA HABERMAN
520 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
HARVEY ROBIDEAU
540 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
THOMAS SEIFERT
600 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
JOHN NICOLAY
608 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
PETER THIELEN
665 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
THOMAS & JUDY MEIER
695 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MONA JEAN KAHL
JOHN ARMITAGE & SHONDA WARNER
745 PLEASANT VIEW ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ALAN W. LENHART
6575 PLEASANT VIEW WAY
C_,HANHA,SSEN, MN 55317
BLAISE & KAY WATSON
750 QUIVER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
t~'RIAN BATZU
100 SANDY HOOK ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
PETER MOSCATELLI
102 SANDY HOOK ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHASE & DIANE BOHLIG
5200 RIDGE ROAD
EDINA, MN 55436
SCCr'I-I' & CA.THY NELSON
106 SANDY HOOK ROAD
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
GLADYS MCCARY
108 SANDY HOOK ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JOHN S KERN
109 SANDY HOOK ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
P~LADYS MCCARY
108 SANDY HOOK ROAD
-CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ROBERT B & SUE MIDNESS
112 SANDY HOOK ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ROBERT MIDNESS
112 SANDY HOOK ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
WILLIAM SPLIETHOFF
113 SANDY HOOK ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
TOM PALMBY
114 SANDY HOOK ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
STEVE FROST
80 SANDY HOOK ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
GARY MILLER
7632 SOUTH SHORE DRIVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
STEVEN & CAROL DONEN
7636 SOUTH SHORE DRIVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
THOMAS & PAMELA DEVINE
PO BOX 714
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
SANDRA SEDO
7644 SOUTH SHORE DRIVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
COLONIAL GROVE ASSOC.
CHARLES HIRT
7007 CHEYENNE TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MARK SENN
7160 WILLOW VIEW COVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
PEGGY NAAS/STEVE MESTITZ
7200 WILLOW VIEW COVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHANHASSEN BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENTS AND APPPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 12, 1999
Chairperson Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:10 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Willard Johnson, Carol Watson and Steven Berquist
STAFF PRESENT: Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner I
A REQUEST FOR A 12~515 SQ. FT. VARIAN~ FROM THE 20~000 SQ. FT. MINIMUM
LOT AREA REQUIREMENT FOR RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT LAKES~ A 12.5
FOOT VARIANCE FROM ~ 90 FOOT MINIMUM LOT WIDTH REQUIREMENT~
A 14 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 30 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK
REQUIREMENT~ A 3 FOOT VARIANCE FROM TI:IF. i0 FOOT SIDE YARD
SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND A 51 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 75 FOOT
MINIMUM WIDTH REQUIREMENT FOR RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT LAKE
LOTS FOR LAKE ACCESS FOR TFIE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMII.Y
HOME~ BOB AND BRINN WITT~ 8572 CARDIFF LANE~ SHOREWOOD~ (LOT 42~
SHORE ACRES).
Cynthia Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item.
Carol Watson asked if the proposed home has a basement, because it is not shown on the plans.
Bob Witt responded that the home does have a basement and that it will be the same footprint as
the rest of the home.
Watson asked what the height of the home will have to be in order for a full basement to be
constructed. She commented that it will have to be a tall home.
Mr. Witt stated that the home is si~tmificantly under the 35 foot maximum height. He explained
that the front elevation is approximately 27 feet and the lake side is just under 35 feet. Mr. Witt
stated that they are aware that a walk-out will not be possible, based on a conversation with the
engineering department.
Watson stated that the engineering department recommended against a walk-out.
Mr. Witt explained engineering's concern was that drainage be directed properly and that the
driveway grade not exceed 10 percent.
Watson stated that she wanted to make certain the applicant understood the situation.
Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes
January 12, 1999
Page 2
Willard Johnson asked the applicant if the driveway length could be increased from 16 feet to 20
feet, thus shifting the house into the lakeshore setback.
Mr. Witt explained his plan to increase the footprint of the house by 104 sq. ft. from the
submitted site plan. He stated that with the additional living space, the impervious surface would
only be 25.5 percent. He commented the additional space may not be needed.
Watson stated that the additional living space and the additional driveway together would exceed
the maximum impervious surface permitted.
Johnson asked if the house will maintain the 75 foot lakeshore setback.
Mr. Witt stated that the house could be shifted 2 feet into the lakeshore setback.
Watson asked what the lakeshore setback will be if the house is shifted 4 feet from the front
property line.
Kirchoffresponded that the site plan is not accurate.
Berquist stated that the setbacks could be 75 feet on the lake and 16 on the street.
Don Sitter, 9249 Lake Riley Blvd., asked if he could make a comment.
Johnson stated that it is not a public hearing, but he will allow him to speak.
Sitter stated that a 16 foot driveway is not long enough. He stated that the house should be
shifted towards the lake to accommodate a larger parking area. He explained that he does not
like it, but it will improve the parking situation. Mr. Sitter recommends the maximum
impervious surface be maintained. He questioned the number of stories in the house.
Watson stated the house will have a basement and the lowest floor must be 3 feet above the
highest water level.
Sitter stated that it will not work.
Watson stated that it will have to in order to meet ordinance requirements.
Sitter stated that a variance should be given from the lakeshore setback, but the maximum
impervious surface should be maintained.
Watson said that they should give on the lake and maintain a 20 foot front yard setback.
Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes
January 12, 1999
Page 3
Peter Pemrick, 9251 Kiowa Trail, stated that the lot is too small for a house.
Johnson stated that the property is a lot of record.
Watson stated that the city has to allow a reasonable use of the property, otherwise the city is
"taking" the property from the owner.
Pemrick stated the house should maintain all the required setbacks.
Johnson stated the city has three problem areas, and this is one of them.
Pemrick stated the lot is ridiculously small for a house.
Mr. Witt stated that in 1989 variances were granted for the construction of a home. He explained
that the variances granted were much greater than the current proposal. Mr. Witt stated that the
proposal is much smaller and that they need an extra 5 percent of impervious surface.
Watson moved, Berquist seconded the motion to approve a 12,515 sq. fi. variance from the
20,000 sq. ft. minimum lot area requirement on a recreational development lake, a 1225 foot
variance from the 90 foot minimum lot width requirement, a 51 foot variance from the 75 foot lot
width requirement for riparian lots for lake access, a 10 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard
setback requirement, a 3 foot variance from the 10 foot side yard setback requirement and a 4
foot variance from the 75 foot shoreland setback requirement for the construction of a single
family home with the following conditions;
1. The applicant shall submit a survey completed by a licensed surveyor.
A detailed grading, drainage, and erosion control plan with 2-foot contours shall be
submitted at time of building permit application for review and approval by the City.
3. The basement of the home must be 3 feet above the ordinary high water mark of the lake.
m
Type II1 erosion control must be maintained until all vegetation has been restored.
5. The applicant shall maintain the 10 foot required dock setbacks.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes
January 12, 1999
Page 4
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Watson moved, Johnson seconded the motion to approve the
minutes of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting dated December 22, 1998. All voted
in favor and the motion carried.
Berquist moved, Watson seconded the motion to adjourn. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m.
Prepared and Submitted by
Cynthia Kirchoff
Pla~mer I