3 Appeal Decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, 6711 Hopi Road
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
BOA DATE: 1/13/97
3
CCDATE: 2/9/98
CASE #: 97-12VAR
By: Kirchoff:v
~--
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL:
A request for a an 8 foot variance from the 1 0 foot side yard setback and a
10 foot variance from the 30 f{lot front yard setbad~ for the construction of a .
detached garage:
-
'?
-
:{
)
-
J
L.
L
t
LOCATION:
6711 Hopi Road
(Lots 1100, 1102-1106, 1112, 1116-1117, Carver Beach)
APPLICANT:
Dan Rutledge
671 1 Hopi Road
Chanhassen. MN 55317
(935-5558)
ACREAGE:
Approximately 12,600 sq. ft.
DENSITY:
N/A
ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USES:
N: RSF, Single Family Residential
S: RSF, Single Family ResIdential
F- RSF, Single Family Residential
W: RSF, Single Family Residential
~
-
~
r.J
WATER AND SEWER:
Available to the site
PHYSICAL CHARACTER:
This site contains a single family dwelling. A garage is not
presently on site. The topography contains a steep slope on
the northern portion of the property and mature trees.
-
f)
2000 LAND USE PLAN:
Low Density Residential
o
o
N
.-f
o
o
.-f
.-f
o
o
o
.-f
o
o
O"l
o
o
00
o
o
t'
o
o
1.0
o
o
It)
o
o
oqt
o
o
M
o
o
N
c
C
r"
~\ ~R. ,< = '" ~",J ~::i:.S{'f!1:q2~~ ': -., -1.. -., .J;~~~l~ .s2J~..~,.. _, i
,I ~ -1;. !~~j\ fQr~.;}~~t" ~~~~ ". ·
0- -'\~<t{' "Tl" ~~~-, ~'-\ ;~~ I ~
~~ fi7i [ CJ -:;-<1\..j~ ~ ~. ~~ ~ \ \\~~d..t ~ ~-J71
j~~ 17JJI/i' fS ~C:~ ~~-"".-~~E'D\~~U ,,,,~ .~\~/~~~~~;~~
~~ It:-., ~:g I \niJ\et y' Jiol;/h- :' Jf ~" Fox [Z: ~ ("\mY>~
~ u M~" ~ ~/ ~iii!""oth--- I
H~' ~ / ;:.{ =- c>- ~<;f-j , ',,~ ~"" . ..y' r - ~/
~r-)i~gt I J CarverB~a~, N l / I/M-r<. ' "I :... Lot~S:: .eq::
I,. ~,~l ,b+gr'OJ1~1ll ~ \ c::f!--l /1 1 / ' ale = rl ~
l(Y/(J >" .- I. I I I' I [\.L~) '\ . ~ fE;; ~ '~'" ~'1::> park:R k[Jf~'
'l hen n oah-J bd.,l,-rl ~r "'\l. '0 :J L.,. .............<<'
~~ tre1" U. ,~ . ~ '4.....-', ~f " r!J ~ 'e, ;,.',: \
1 '\ \ . , I . " '"
L, .U '.' -W Y;; ,7 I (~o
. ~ _ \~ e,
t, r- :::~~Ell~\m~~~ ::;~ ~r0 ~ /
: ef-f c:= m ~~~./I .. ~"",, 1 "~jJ .\\ / rTl
\ 5.~ V ~y:;,' )-.( ~ 0 0 ------...j.'::.... A...'-LLU
, /. <t I
LOt'LiS
'O;V~
8tD
I //~~~l~h1
\j~JJ;'f%0j\ Tl
\.- -------~~
~-,\ ?
\..-.!?1.
La k e F~".\'~
'" '~,\.'
\ "--.( c.)
'l / .,r7
/ ,/ .',^
<-....:. .... *-'
.......---<~
o
~
~\
~H\~
I'Ll I~)~"
Rutledge Variance
February 4, 1998
Page 2
UPDA TE: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
On January 13, 1998 the Board of Adjustments and Appeals reviewed this application.
The Board denied the request for a 10 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard variance
and the 8 foot variance from the 10 foot side yard setback. However, they did approve a 2
foot variance from the 10 side yard setback. This was to allow the applicant to construct a
22 foot wide garage. The Board felt that this offered a reasonable use of the property. The
applicant contends that a 22 foot wide garage is unacceptable. Mr. Rutledge is appealing
the decision for the side yard setback variance only. The applicant would like to construct
the original proposal at the 30 foot front yard setback.
The applicant has an alternative to the original variance request. In this proposal, the
garage has an 8 foot cantilever or a carport. It intends to protect a vehicle from the
elements. However, eaves may only encroach 2 feet 6 inches into a required setback, so the
applicant must request a 5 foot 6 inch variance.
This staff report has been updated. All new information is in bold type and all old
information has been struck through.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Section 20-615 states that in single family residential districts the minimum side yard setback is
10 feet.
Section 20 615 states that in single family residential districts the minimum front yard setback is
30 feet.
Section 20-908 states that eaves may project a distance not exceeding 2 feet 6 inches into any
required side yard.
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. Although many of these variances were for lot area, not setbacks. Without
these variances, the owner could not make a reasonable use of the property.
Rutledge Variance
February 4, 1998
Page 3
M.aRY variances have been granted in the Carver Beach area to allow a reasonable use of the
prof>erty. For instance, 6699 Hopi Road, the neighboring property, has been granted two
variances for additions. A kitchen, living room and garage were added to an existing 24 foot by
20 foot home. The existing location of the home required that the additions encroach into
setbacks. (The home was located on the property line.) The fact that a property is located in
Carver Beach does not guarantee or warrant a variance. Many properties enjoy a reasonable use
while maintaining required setbacks.
The subject property is an irregular shaped lot and does have topographic challenges, however,
an area exists for the garage without a variance. The property is a total of 10 lots combined into
one parcel.
ANALYSIS
This application requests twe a varianceS;-6fl6 from the 10 foot side yard setback and the otaer
from the 30 foot front yard setback. The applicant would like to construct a 26 foot by 28 foot
(728 sq. ft.) accessory structure. There currently is a small 74 sq. ft. shed and a 2-story single-
family home on the property. The shed will be demolished prior to the construction of the
garage. The two lots which front Hopi Road are the proposed location of the accessory structure.
The home is located on the remaining lots. The extreme northern portion of the property
contains a steep slope and mature trees. The two lots which abut Hopi Road are relatively flat.
SIDE YARD VARIANCE
The variance from the side yard setback is requested because the two lots are only 40 feet in
width and the proposed garage is 28 feet wide. Staff still believes that the garage's width could
be reduced to 20 feet and the depth could be increased from 26 feet. This is an average size for a
double garage and would still allow a reasonable use of the property. (Actually, the proposal is
larger than some of the homes in Carver Beach.) According to their surveys most neighboring
garages range from 12 feet to 24 feet in width.
Even though the applicant was granted a 2 foot variance from the northern side yard
setback which entitles him to build a 22 foot wide garage, the decision to deny the larger
variance is being appealed. The Board did not limit the length of the garage. The
applicant would like to construct the original proposal at the 30 foot front yard setback
(rather than at the 20 foot as noted on Attachment 3). Staff contends that a 22 foot wide
garage is more than acceptable, particularly because a hardship does not exist.
In the attached appeal letter, the applicant stated that the neighbors feel as though a 22
foot by 30 foot garage would be more detrimental to the neighborhood than a 28 foot by 26
foot as originally proposed. There is only a 4 foot difference in length. Staff believes that
approving a larger variance is inappropriate because a 22 foot wide garage can be built.
Rutledge Variance
February 4, 1998
Page 4
Building Code Requirements for the North Wall
The Uniform Building Code requires that exterior walls of less than three feet from the property
line be of one-hour fire-resistive construction with no openings. The UBC permits overhangs to
extend one-third the distance to the property line or a maximum of 12" into the area where
openings are not permitted. Should the garage be constructed where indicated on the submitted
survey, no overhangs would be permitted on north wall.
AL TERNA TE PROPOSAL- 8 foot cantilever
The applicant has a second option for the construction of the garage. This is proposed to
be a 20 foot wide structure with an 8 foot cantilever or overhang on the northern portion.
It is proposed to be built at the 30 foot setback and will have no visible supports. This
would allow the applicant to park a vehicle in the driveway while it is protected from the
elements.
The zoning ordinance allows eaves to encroach into a required setback 2.5 feet. The
proposed overhang is 8 feet, so a 5.5 foot variance is needed. Staff believes that this
cantilever is unnecessary because the applicant has been granted permission to construct a
22 foot wide garage.
Building Code Requirements
The UBC permits overhangs to extend one-third the distance to the property line or a
maximum of 12" into the area where openings are not permitted. In this case the building
code would permit the overhangs to be within 24" of the property line. The building code
does require projections in the area where openings are not permitted (anything within 36"
of the property line) to be of one-hour fire-resistive construction. The UBC has no
requirements for fire-resistive construction when exterior walls and overhangs are greater
than three feet from the property line.
An unsupported overhang of this magnitude will produce unusual stresses on the building
walls, roof and foundation. For this reason a structural engineer will be required to design
the bearing walls, truss attachments and foundation. The trusses must also be designed by an
engineer.
FRONT YARD VARIANCE
The applicant has not appealed the decision to deny the front yard variance. The garage
will be built at the 30 foot frout yard setback. The aw1ioaHt is also re",::~:g : ~::;'::e~om
tha 30 foot from yard .atbaolL ThIS prOjlarty bas two frout )'llFds beeause I. :v;i~';;:;;~~:i:;;
DrIve and HOpI Road. The aceessory struetllre must meet the 30 foot front Jar I
Rutledge Variance
February 4, 1998
Page 5
:'''I'~ ~:. ;:: '::0:::::;' tkat tile gamge OllllB~~~ ~~ ~~k ~ .~~::= .
::.:=::;;. "e va treos lB tile V10lftlty .ftlte pr"l'os~. ~~~~~: ~"::~
:'~ ~": :":~~~~ ~~:~'i~ not be r....ov.a. The otlter is jllst ean! ~~: ~~=~.~:
:- f r _I ). ..IT wOllla like Ie seo tile g",!~ ~~~ ~O f::;:etbaek
:ii~:,~ =:':; str;ot, in Ca,vor Be.ollare more "".HOW than ,;eot' ~ ~~~
:::::.;:' ..or , a Ie adORg ,1l0lMa ee p",vlllea on P'!'Iate p"'perty. H~:~~ ~!~~et
:;=~:n~=~:~U:::::~~~:e~~I~::;;t par~cing~, ~~~~:~r:'~o'7oot
5=S' ~~:~:.Iot is sufficient for tkis garage, tIte~~:~~:o~;: ;:.
:_: :t=e.cnt, and tke Gftnp. .ad lopogfllplly ~~~~ ~~ ~'~::~
~; r, . ~~;~ ~~ exist. The applicant has a reasonable opportunity to plaee a 20
foot wide doHble garage on the proflerty.
The City Council recently approved a zoning ordinance amendment that prohibits encroachments
into setbacks that have been granted variances. In this situation, the eaves on the garage would
not be permitted to encroach into the "new" setback. If the variances are approved, the overhang
on the north side must be a distance of two feet from the property line and there shall be no
overhang into the new 20 front yard setback. This will reduce the width of the garage to 26 feet,
however.
A home or garage should be selected or designed for the size and shape of the lot. Many
variance applications could be avoided if the owners would design the structure to
compliment the lot. Permission should not be granted to allow this to happen, unless there
is a hardship. The fact that 3-car garages are being built in new subdivisions does not
justify this variance. A comparison is made with those within 500 feet. The fact is, a two-
stall garage can be built on this property without a variance. The applicant does have a
reasonable opportunity to construct a !!;ara!!;e that suits the property, so a hardship does not
exist.
Staff still believes that the applicant should maintain the 10 and 30 foot setbacks and that a
hardship does not exist.
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:
a. 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 there are pre-existing standards in
Rutledge Variance
February 4, 1998
Page 6
this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing
downwardJrom them meet this criteria.
Finding: The applicant can place a 2-stall, 20 foot wide garage on the property within the
setbacks. That is an average garage. Therefore, the applicant has a reasonable use of the
property. The proposed 728 sq. ft. garage is larger than some of the homes in Carver Beach.
The applicant was granted permission by the Board to construct a 22 foot wide
garage. A hardship has not been demonstrated to warrant a variance for a wider
garage.
b. 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 majority of the homes meet the required setbacks. Although Carver Beach
does pose challenges, the majority of the structures built after the ordinance do maintain the
required setbacks.
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: The proposal is not based upon the desire to increase the value of the land, but is
based on the need fDr a garage. The applicant commented at the January 13, 1998
meeting that a larger garage will increase the value of the property. A variance is
granted because the applicant has demonstrated a hardship, not because it will allow
the owner to make a profit when the home is sold.
d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship.
Finding: The alleged hardship is self-created. The applicant does have an opportunity to
build a garage in the required setbacks. Furthermore, the applicant was granted a
variance to build a 22 foot wide garage.
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.
Finding:. The variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
land.
f. 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
Rutledge Variance
February 4, 1998
Page 7
of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values
within the p.eighborhood.
Finding: The proposed variation will not impair light and air to adjacent properties or
impair property values. However, if the garage is only placed 20 feet from the property line,
the owner may not have sufficient parking and may have to park on the already narrow Hopi
Road.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion:
"The City Council denies the request for a an g f-oot variance from the 10 side yard setback and a 10
foot variance from tHe 30 foet froat yard setback for the construction of an accessory structure
based upon the findings presented in the staff report and the following:
1. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship to warrant the granting of a variance.
2. The applicant has a reasonable opportunity to construct a detached garage within the setbacks."
Should the City Council approve the 8 foot variance request, the following conditions shall apply:
1. The garage shall maintain the natural drainageway.
2. There shall be no encroachments, including eaves or overhangs, into the new setbacks.
3. The applicant shall obtain a building permit prior to the construction ofa garage.
4. Exterior walls and overhangs shall comply with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code.
5. Address numbers complying with Chanhassen City Policy #29-1992 shall be installed on the
street facing the street.
Should the City Council approve the 5.5 foot variance request for the cantilever, the
following conditions shall apply:
1. The garage shall maintain the natural drainageway.
2. There shall be no encroachments, including eaves or overhangs, into the new setbacks.
3. The applicant shall obtain a building permit prior to the construction of a garage.
Rutledge Variance
February 4, 1998
Page 8
4. Exterior walls and overhangs shall comply with the provisions of the Uniform Building
Code.
5. The applicant shall engage a structural engineer to design the bearing walls, truss
attachments and foundation.
6. Address numbers complying with Chanhassen City Policy #29-1992 shall be installed on
the garage wall facing the street.
A TT ACHMENTS
1. Application and Letter
2. Section 20-615, Lot requirements and setbacks
3. Site Plan
4. Staff Revised Site Plan
5. Memorandum from Steve Kirchman to Cindy Kirchoff dated January 7, 1998
6. Public hearing notice and property owners
7. Minutes from the January 13, 1998 Board of Appeals and Adjustments Meeting
8. Appeal Letter
9. Alternate Proposal
10. Memorandum from Steve Kirchman to Cindy Kirchoff dated February 2, 1998
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
RFf''=\\ 'r-\)
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937-1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
DEe 22 1997
Cpji\\~r1",,,),,);;I'l n....,'''''''''' ,""cr'T
r---.
APPUCANT: L),/J /',
ADDRESS: (c / I \
,/) "
k //. + \ p ':'
~ () r ).
c-) --C
OWNER: n Q (\' >J
ADDRESS: (C' 7 / /
k ,) "
J _! " ,',
1'<; r) j ( t? r:J (.... '~
TELEPHONE (Day time) C. I r:; -
,~)' I
''\ '
\ ~
6!/'~3 /7
q ~,<- r[58
TELEPHONE:
I ,', ,
H()C-'I" Kn
, S{3J17
(c I ~ - if 01- q / ~/ ~
_ Comprehensive Plan Amendment _ Temporary Sales Permit
- Conditional Use Permit - Vacation of ROW/Easements
- Interim Use Permit ~ Variance
_ Non-conforming Use Permit _' Wetland Alteration Permit
_ Planned Unit Development* _ Zoning Appeal
_ Rezoning _ Zoning Ordinance Amendment
_ Sign Permits
_ Sign Plan Review _ Notification Sign
- Site Plan Review* --X- Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost**
($50 CUP/SPRlVACNAR/WAP/Metes
and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB)
- Subdivision* TOTALFEE$ r7Fj.OO
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the
application.
Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews.
'"Twenty-six full size ~ copies of the plans must be submitted, Including an aw' X 11" reduced copy of
transparency for each plan sheet.
".. Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract
NOlE _ When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
PROJECT NAME :; ~ ! f ~"cj y
lOCATION (0 7 /1 A n 0 (' r cd
I
LEGAL DESCRIPTION !- 0 T (i 00, I r (] ~~ ,i i 0 :3
-ADo {1/7 I / /
G-::A. ;I?t- C/~
v
f ,/.~- :' r-7
-J-., ~_..'- I
I t-
.! D I,
./
II 0 S--. U ore, n j ~ I 1/ / ~
I "
TOTAL ACREAGE
. 35/ t/
II ( R -e. s
X NO
WETlANDS PRESENT
PRESENT ZONING
REQUESTED ZONING
PRESENT lAND USE DESIGNATION
YES
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION
.---'
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST / 0
Dr n ()"? r +'/ L ,',,-{J S
i / '
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing th,is application, you should confer with the Planning
Depanment to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
Li)co1e
r
.-, r rl
/, '
f
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written
notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application.
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for 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 Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make
1his application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
1 will 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 with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing
requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day
€xtension f~r deveropme~reyi~lf.{. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review
extensions/.are appr~ov~d 6~ih /applicfint.
\ I "{Z/
- // ,
,r'':''':~;'. -,~'- / '-'" ;;.- ~~- y ,-." I ~ - / to.. CJ7
S~n~re f Ap~.lcant / Date
'~/ ~ /,~- J~-CI'7
'Signature of Fee wner Date
Appnca1ion Received on J :)1 nJ q7 Fee Paid I Q-/9-~ q 7 Receipt No. :}/ <ff6
The appTIcant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting.
Jf not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address.
Daniel Rutledge
6711 Hopi Road
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(612) 401-9145
CITV OF CHANHA,SSEN
,~_r (;:T/EO
DEe 23 1997,
CHA('nr1""CI~ t"'L.rI"""'" DEPT
December 23, 1997
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Attention: To The Board of Adjustment
Dear Sir;
The information below is in regards to the variances that I'm
requesting.
2 Variances
- Lot shape, size and grades.
1st Variance
_ Side yard from 10' to 2'-0" set back width of lot 40'.
_ Remove shed and add sidewalk to house.
Large pine to remain.
_ Roof drainage off front and rear of new garage.
2nd Variance
_ Front yard from 30' to 20' set back.
New garage would line up with the neighbor's buildings.
We wold have larger front lawn and garden area.
Back yard is to steep to garden or mow.
Less hard surface.
Future addition to the house would be to the front,
approximately 8' to 10', making front yard smaller.
If you have any questions regarding this please give me a call at
935-5558.
Sincerely,
Daniel Rutledge
~ 20-595 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
b. For accessory structures, three (3) stories/forty (40) feet.
(7) The minimum driveway separation is as follows:
a. If the driveway is on a collector street, four hundred (400) feet.
b. If the driveway is on an arterial street, one thousand two hundred fifty 0,250)
feet.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V; ~ 4(5-4-5), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 127, ~ 2, 3-26-90; Ord. No. 170, ~ 2, 6-8-92;
Ord. No. 194, ~ 2, 10-11-93)
Sec. 20-596. Interim uses.
The following are interim uses in the "RR" District:
(1) Commercial kennels and stables.
(Ord. No. 120, ~ 3, 2-12-90)
Editor's note-Inasmuch as there exists a ~ 20-595, the provisions added by ~ 3 ofOrd. No.
120 as ~ 20-595 have been redesignated as ~ 20-596.
Sees. 20-597-20-610. Reserved.
Sec. 20-611. Intent.
ARTICLE XII. ''RSF'' SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
The intent of the "RSF" District is to provide for single-family residential subdivisions.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V; ~ 5(5-5-1), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-612. Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in an "RSF" District:
0) Single-family dwellings.
(2) Public and private open space.
(3) State-licensed day care cent2r for twelve (2) or fewer children.
(4) State-licensed group home serving six (6) or fewer persons.
(5) Utility services.
(6) Temporary real estate office and model home.
(7) Antennas as regulated by article XXX pf this chapter.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V; ~ 5(5-5-2), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 259, ~ 11, 11-12-96)
Sec. 20-613. Permitted accessory uses.
The following are pennitted accessory uses in an "RSF" District:
(1) Garage.
Supp. No.9
1210
ZONING
~ 20-615
(2) Storage building.
(3) Swimming pool.
(4) Tennis court.
(5) Signs.
(6) Home occupations.
(7) One (1) 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 reference-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. No.9
1211
~ 20-615
CHANHAsSEN CITY CODE
illustrated below.
Loti Whir. Frontag. I.
M'..ur.d At S.tback Un.
(3) The minimum lot depth is one hundred twenty-five (125) feet. The location of these lots
is conceptually illustrated below. Lot width on nec~ or flag lots and lots accessed by
private driveways shall be one hundred (100) feet as measured at the front building
setback line.
HeCk I Fl.; Lot.
Lot LIne
100'Lot Width
,
, , . .
. , I
+--- L. -'-.1 .
: ~ ~,
, Lee ..... ,
.. I
" .
L - L _ _ . _ J_ ....J
(4) The maximum lot coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is twenty-five (25)
percen t.
*(5) The setbacks are as follows:
a. For front yards, thirty (30) feet.
b. For rear yards, thirty (30) feet.
Supp. No.9 1212
ZONING
~ 20-632
c. For side yards, ten (10) feet.
(6) The setbacks for lots served by private driveways and/or neck lots are as follows:
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-Section 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 single-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. :-<0. 9
1213
'.::; ;-:::.'
'. ,
., I ~.
,e: ..... ~
:n.m.l
o~ 'n
al:' :; 1
6 1M
.(
.-.
~ ;,. .~...
o
CD
~
~
.;
~
"
c
.S
:,;
C
"
.::
o
c
c
o
c
U
,;
o
o
<r
o
"OJ-
'f ;:
0 z
u. 0
>- >=
[l/<li"E w Q.
> ir
/ <r u
~ Vl
'./1 W
0
o
rJ "S t:i~:
I
~ 6 - J4"27"37"
, " T
\.~ V
-'
~
~
:z , ro- ; ~ "'1
,;. c. v
"!- \, ~
~
~
~ . t', -
.r, '-
~ ...J.....
, r0- T
C. V .
~ ~
~- - -
"'" !b
- .... T
. , %
" J
~ /
- - - .-' -..",...,
/ ,
\
";/
/
/ '5
".
/ I
/ I
I
,
~ r
-?
\' . .)'
& I
I
\ I
" " e I
\ 0 0-.
, <>/
\ ....
.(,.,"'
~t-"" t
i
!
I
() I
I
,of I
\If.l I
\'\
\\ll
rJ /
/
/
A
(' /
.J
V
.J \ ,.'
~'^^
\~" {~ )
~p~V
'\ V ~
/:
/ I
".
..
o c
o~E
~C
c u
.go g
~~b
c c c
:: 0 u
" '0 U
~~:~
... ~ > I !'!
u 11I= ....
~"'O 0 I 0
'- u"Q I ~
:~; ~:~~
: g ~ I~ i
5~5 :;; ~1'l~
o:5~ ~ ~2
!!o~~'i :
.!! :; '_.. !! ~ c
S.c ~.~ _ :i
_acCo ~
,g~:ocn>. n
"'6~5~
z~.a.o,-I:.
o~~:gOo;
~3:ogN
u:>..o ,,-.!!
~ ~ ~.~: s
~~~B5~
_"'E~g
<D
N
- .;
uig
g ~
c
If'i:i
o
=;5
~g
~u
..
. u
..,>
0"
_ 0
_U
N c"
~..g
'-'-0.
.0
5"
;:c
u
o~
~m
- ~
~ ~
00
--'u
>-
"
o....:~'"'~
u :; '" 0 0
~~~",g5-
:~~~~;
:;30~~
=E=~~~
g ~~ ~ :S'!!
.it! ~ =: ~'lfI a
~.!!~~5t
~5.5aEr=
~._ E c U '0
:i~:g,Q
.~~ cn~'>' ~
g::::-ga.g
:o~.~o~
.c...J'OEeu
:o~.25e~
o~cS;Q.b
c :.::: ""5 J '; " 0
.g~o~u5.
g~~(;~_.n
5-;;0.....0"1
.~ ~ o-.!~~o
t) :5 .€ ~.~ ~ (;
~~~~:~u
_... U
Vi"': N -
~ t'"i
o
z
u
z
~
~
0(1)
zO:
o
od>-
W
0>
-10:
W:J
u:(f.)
Z
<5
W
, ~~;'~,t~,:~;,. .~ "
,~~ .t.'
. '-'
to
l,/J u
Z u
0 0
0
0 ~
,~ '1 0.
.W 0
.<!J I
0 ~
~
W l'-
to
I- Iii
In
W
,a: ~
a
l" a
,;. Ck: <
'.0
'lL.. >-
L>- I-
~
r{~ w
P,l~ 0-
,0
,J. => Ck:
r a..
..r, .
.,' ,7j,
,'.,: ;.
: ,~
.~
t
\.
r,
~
,f"
\ "
V ..J
00
..-'u
~'-
_ III
1'1>
00
::: u'.
o
w
.;J
4:
U
V1
Z
o
i=
0-
~
U
In
W
a
~ '-
III
11\ >
+,'-
00
-'u
~QC::
0"0 g
G)a~ r..:
.5 ~5 . ~
.r:. >. ~
c..... c .
(f).... 0 -0 :-ff,'
._' Q _.C a-
11\ in'- ;!.<
:c .~ iii "0'-
..... a ,g"O 0
......"'lJ._cn>-
'~3;gc.g
.....0:J0
:: 2;'.J:l.D '- .;;
Z'-IIl=Ocn
o ;::: ,C 0' N
i=1Il+,....E
'.< U..... 0 e .~
u>.o ....,C
G:.D >.:5' ~ '":'
i=~IIl:;:;>'"O
eJ~~8~dL
U _ ~;!:';:~;
>.
.0
,.....:'...~z.......
~. .
~.,t~:?f;,.:. '. -ii ;~ -. ~
t.-
~
J
~
A
'JJ
--
~
0'
"-
b.
~
(1\
, ...;:.......
"'.... ':.7,
....~. .
: <.':;t
.':i.a. '
;:~r~~~.'
, ~./~~~
.....
,,'~iY
'.. 'r';~:'
t '. ':~~~'.:'. ~\':i;~
~.. :.~ "~
. ...; " .~.
.~
ii!b-
.t.
.t"'.' t"
.... .'
~ :~,' ~.
l:'~;-.~.
. .;.,.,
~.
~
..... It)
~.:\1,.;( ;; .,.!' ;
. ~,~.,:~ ~: :-:~ -: . :. ... .--: r: ~"......
.,'. .". '?-. .
(. . ~ .
.,....t. .~ .:'.
~; .,~ ~ '.', .
. '.>, ';ri .
.'. ~ i
~~:
:..' ~..."
. ,"
.; ~"~ ~ I
.~'jf. "':\ ',' "
S4
. ~
. t-.,
'r~
" { \;,,)
~
...-r:\t";/,;(i ,..{ .
.'; ;'\
.l.c"
~~. .. :;'
.';).'~-.r'::
','. .,
'.- f
:;.
1"":,
",! ,
.... 1 , ",
.,- ~ . ~~" .
" ',:
0 --r
\
Ul L. v \
. ,';
\D
t'l .'::~
-~
~ ,,:!
\ '" --r
-t L. V I
',.
~ ;' '
, 'If\EE
Pl\I"
,
L'.
0. --r
V I
\ " ~
'.l.~"~V"'"
" 0
L. V
~ . \".~, ",'
.:{ -:::~; '.:.~,. : ':
.~.~
".. ,4 ",
.-
z
. ;\
o
'"
. c'
No
',0._
+'
-u
. _ u
'0<
~,C
'r" 0'
. c
0"
ow
.~
~
,."
f.' J~ [\1 E
/
~'f .l ~
" 1. f' (' \
I ,\.Jd
......"0
\
'\
\
~.
'0
"
r;'
'-
<
~
- ---
.,
. ,~
\,\\ '
\) "
: I ':t,~\::. ',~' ..
~ ,)"'(
'J .' ..\" .() - -
'0' ',t, .
..,.'\ )
.~ .
.-'" "
'" ,
/
\
\
., ., I'
I "i \.
7'
-- '--
..:..,
\ '.'
'c
//
,
.--'
\
.,..
,
~ f' "l
, \.) L-
i\
\
:-- ..:.-- -'J ~)j;- "1'
, ;~,
A .., f' -.:. I
t ......J \..1
i
.;)
..t .
;~:{;~'~."- :~.
.-~ .
,.'1.;.
':1 '~l
..
\
,
'.
":.'
\
,...
I
.\ G
, L.
1.-
i
-
,'.
.'
~----
, i .
, ':~'
I'~\ .
., # "
'{.... \~,' ;,.i
. ...\i..../. -
. ~?;
-<,7 .'
,,/ ' .:
" '? 1"
. <1:0/
.: ,,<f~"\'
<y'
'.
-<
CJ'
, ...
.-
(J /
,; ./ ~
" / ,
~
,
('
J ..
,
,,' /
.<
r-
, .,J
/
"
\, .'/
. ,'/..'
Y. ~
/
..
..
..
(-
.J
:. t~
, : \,\
. \\0
I~.
-J
C ITV OF
CHAlfHASSElf
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Cindy Kirchoff, Planner I
FROM:
Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official
\ C\ '\(A
DATE:
January 7, 1998
SUBJECT:
97-12 V AR (6711 Hopi Road, Mr. Dan Rutledge)
I was asked to review the variance proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, DEe 23
1997, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. II for the above referenced project.
Analvsis:
Building code requirements. The Uniform Building Code (UBC) classifies the garage as a U-l occupancy
and provides requirements for fire-resistive construction and opening protection for exterior walls within
three feet of the property line.
UBC Table 5-A requires exterior walls less than three feet from the property line be of one-hour fire-
resistive construction with no openings. The UBC permits overhangs to extend one-third the distance to the
property line or a maximum of 12" into the area where openings are not permitted. Should the garage be
constructed where indicated on the submitted survey, no overhangs would be permitted on the north wall.
The UBC has no requirements for fire-resistive construction when exterior walls and overhangs are greater
than three feet from the property line.
Address numbers. The UBC and Chanhassen City Policy # 29-1992 requires address numbers at least 5"
high be placed on the garage wall facing the street.
Recommendations:
Should the variance be granted, the following conditions should be included:
I. Exterior walls and overhangs shall comply with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code.
2. Address numbers complying with Chanhassen City Policy #29-1992 shall be installed on the garage
wall facing the street.
g:lsafetylsak\mcrnos\planlrutldge I
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
Tuesday, January 13, 1998
at 6:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
690 Coulter Drive
PROJECT: Side and Front Yard
Setback Variance
DEVELOPER: Dan Rutledge
LOCATION: 6711 Hopi Road
NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. T
applicant. Dan Rutledge, is requesting an 8 foot variance to the 10' side yard setback and a 10 foot
variance from the 30' front yard setback for the construction of a detached garage on property zoned
RSF and located at 6711 Hopi Road.
What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the
developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting
the Board 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 of Adjustments discusses project. The Board will then
make a decision on the project.
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.
:RALD BOUCHER
20 WESTERN DRIVE
IANHASSEN, MN 55317
HNJOHNSON
34 NEZ PERCE DRIVE
IANHASSEN, MN 55317
N WOITALLA
39 NEZ PERCE DRIVE
ANHASSEN, MN 55317
~HELLE COOK
36 HOPI ROAD
ANHASSEN, MN 55317
'111 & JEFF BRAIEDY
I WESTERN DRIVE
ANHASSEN, MN 55317
'NE BECKMAN
9 HOPI ROAD
Cl.NHASSEN, MN 55317
'l.IG ANDERSON
3 HOPI ROAD
'l.NHASSEN, MN 55317
EBLE CO
ALBERT OTTERDAHL 6715 NEZ PERCE
VE
\NHASSEN, MN 55317
L1AM PEDEN
7 HOPI ROAD
\NHASSEN, MN 55317
'( OF CHANHA.SSEN
COUL TEFt-BR
\NHASSEN, MN 55317
DARIN & ALLISON GACHNE
6670 DEERWOOD DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
EVELYN A. REIFENBERGER
6680 DEERWOOD DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
STATE OF MINNESOTA IN TRUST
C/O CARVER COUNTY AUDITOR 600 EAST
4TH STREET
CHASKA, MN 55318-2184
ALBERT OTTEROAHL
6715 NEZ PERGt: DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
GARY OTTER DAHL
6691 DEERWOOD DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
BLAISE & KAY WATSON
750 QUIVER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ANDREW CLEMENS
6687 DEERWOOD DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CITY OF CHANH-ASSEN
6~? ~.~ptR DRIVE
C~ASSEN, MN 55317
BRUCEJOHNSCHURMANN
116 ELM STREET NORTH
LESTER PRAIRIE, MN 55354
ERIC MEESTER
6610 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
AARON & MEGAN GORDON
6650 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
DAVID G HOLUB
6670 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
DONALD SENNES
6680 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
DONALD SENNES
6680 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MICHAEL WEGLER
6630 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
VERMONT ISAACSON
6640 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN. MN 55311
PETER LUSTIG
6699 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MARTHA NYGREN
6650 LOTUS TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
KEITH GUNDERSON
6660 LOTUS TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHRIS/CYNTHIA ANDERSON
6680 LOTUS TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHRIS ANDERSON
6680 LOTUS TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
KEITH M. VOLK
790 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
KENNETH LUCAS
6735 NEZ PERCE DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MARY KAY HOGUE
6690 NEZ PERCE DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
DAN RUTLEDGE
6711 j::lOPI ROAD
gHANHASSEN. MN 55317
ANGIE WILTZ
841 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
GARY J. HOFFMAN
860 HIAWATHA DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
WILLIAM & SHARON WOLFE
6699 HOPI ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
THOMAS RAYMOND
834 CREE DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ANDY BORASH
6725 NEZ PERCE DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
WILLIAM MOREI'IO
6727 HOPI ROAU
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ANDREW & NICOLE SIEMENS
6780 YUMA DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
ROBERT WIEST
840 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
LARRY BARRETT
6741 HOPI ROAD
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
MELVIN HERRMANN
795 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
CRAIG & MONICA KIFFMEYER
6710 HOPI ROAD
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
ALEX ESS
6890 LOTUS TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MARTIN JENSEN
770 CREE DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MICHAEL WOITALLA
6712 HOPI ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MRS. ELDON DEGLER
6711 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
RICHARD SPARTZ
777 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
PETER KORDONOWY
6711 NEZ PERCE DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
BRUCE JOHANSSON
6701 MOHAWK DRIVE
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
JEFFERY KING
767 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
AL OTTERDAHL
6715 NEZ PERCE DRIVE
CHANHASSEN. MN 55317
TODD FROSTAD
6728 LOTUS TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
GREGORY J. CARLSON
760 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CARRIE & BRIAN DETERMAN
800 CARVER BEACH ROAD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
PAULA VELTKAMP
6724 LOTUS TRAIL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
TODD FRO~JAD/
672~G-TOS TRAIL
9HANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHANHASSEN BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENTS AND APPPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 13, 1998
Chairperson Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Willard Johnson, Steven Berquist and Nancy Mancino
STAFF PRESENT: Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner I
A REQUEST FOR AN 8 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT SIDE YARD AND A
REQUEST FOR A 10 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 30 FOOT FRONT YARD
SETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE. DANIEL RUTLEDGE. 6711
HOPI ROAD.
Cynthia Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item.
Daniel Rutledge stated that a 20 foot wide garage is too small. He explained his plan for two, ten
foot wide doors on the 28 foot wide garage as this will allow the vehicle doors to be opened
without hitting the other vehicle in the garage. Mr. Rutledge explained that he variance from the
30 foot front yard setback was needed because this would allow for more green space and a
garden area. He mentioned that his vehicle is 17 feet in length and even if the garage was placed
at the 30 foot setback, an additional vehicle could not be parked in the driveway. Mr. Rutledge
stated that the neighbors do not oppose this proposal because this is an investment for the future
property owner.
Sharon Wolfe, 6699 Hopi Road, stated that the proposal would not affecting her sight line.
Steven Berquist asked if the applicant had considered purchasing Lot 1118 so that a larger garage
could be constructed.
Rutledge responded that the previous owner did pose that question to the neighbor, but they did
not wish to sell.
Berquist commented that a potential buyer would probably value an attached garage rather than a
detached garage located a distance from the home.
Rutledge stated that an attached garage is not an option and that he has not approached the
owner.
Berquist stated that he believes that a future owner of the neighboring property will be affected
by the proposal even though the current owner will not. He explained that he must weigh all
issues into his decision.
Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes
January 13, 1998
Page 2
Wolfe reassured the Board that the proposed garage will not affect her because she has natural
screemng.
Rutledge stated that the proposed garage will line up with the adjacent properties' garages.
Willard Johnson stated that he would like to see a 30 foot setback along Hopi Road. He believes
that a width of 22 feet is sufficient for a garage.
Rutledge responded that he will only build it 26 feet wide because he does not want to build a
fire wall.
Nancy Mancino stated that Carver Beach is wonderful eclectic neighborhood and that many
variance have had to be granted in order for homes to be built. She stated that there is no reason
that the garage could not be placed 30 feet from the property line. She explained that a smaller
two-car garage may be difficult to get two vehicles parked.
Berquist stated that he is inclined to approve a 2 foot variance to build a 22 foot wide garage with
a 30 foot front yard setback. He stated that he must make a decision that make sense not what
necessarily suits the applicant.
Berquist moved, Johnson seconded the motion to close the public hearing.
Berquist moved, Mancino seconded the motion to deny the 8 foot variance from the 10 foot side
yard setback and the 10 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback and approve a 2 foot
variance from the side yard setback for the construction of a garage. All voted in favor and the
motion carried.
Mancino questioned if the City Code regulates the depth of an accessory structure.
Kirchoff responded that only square footage is regulated
APPROV AL OF MINUTES: Berquist moved to approve the minutes of the Board of
Adjustments and Appeals Meeting dated November 5, 1997. Mancino abstained. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:05 p.m.
Prepared and Submitted by Cynthia Kirchoff
Planner I
Dan Rutledge
6711 Hopi Road
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(612) 401-9145
SC# 474-96-2863
Jaanuary 20, 1998
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Attention: Cynthia R. Kirchoff
Dear Ms. Kirchoff;
I intend to appeal only one of the two variances applied for. My
appeal is for the 8' variance from the 10' side yard set back.
After discussing the granted variance with my neighbors their
opinion was they did not Want me to build a 221 Wide 30' long
garage on my property. My neighbors tel t that Ule way it was
approved would be a detriment to the neighborhood. They would
prefer I built the garage the way it \l,7as applied for which then
needs the 8' variance from the 101 side yard set back.
I do appreciate the opportunity for' this appeal.
.. -.
RUTLEDGE CONST CO
\..
oJ....
\.q
..s')
I
~
~\
!!
~
..
~ *=
,g ~
0- Yo
I
..... '
Q)
o
z
x
cu ..'
LL
4
(\
#
~ OJ
,g :;j
0- Yo
-
I--
TEL ~~o. 9356415
I
Feb 2,98 10:00 No.004 P.O
I
~
~
~ III ~
Y10 .a.
~ oJ'l
~'?~ It) j ....
~") 0 ~
" 0 '- ~
~S' +
.I'l' I,
,01 "- t) ...
~\.:: ~
\...
Q
()
o
<0
C"b
.
>
'0
~
""
...
(D
'PRDFOSAf.,.~ - ~. ()ve,yhta~
.(2
-
II
"'-N
cSJ
---
~ ^
- ~
a~
-lll
(/)
'-
~
r;0
{--..-.----..-....-. ..------.-...---------------.------.-- '._-,. /
tU
Lu ~
> (1 -!...
.--<f
" \/ / / '/:'/..// //~, 0 t:: 2
~/ '''\"'''.<~,,,'>~-''~' '. ,'\~/.. --- > -- ~ ~ :2
" A', '. \h. <( '. < 0-
" ','- ". '. >- ''';::: " ::- y "'-'
' " ''"' " ''0 '\ ' '" W '"
'-, " '\ " /', , '. p: ;..l.!
.~.- . ,-. \'\---~-~--__1____~._
'.(~ -------
III
--!J
<(
Q:..
<
~
~
-
(j
T
:J.
~
i=
\.ll.
cJ)
C)
~ V1
\) --, .
7~_
ctl~0
-~"-
lli\S2
() ::... n
- (j?)
~>-
"'..:J ,:)
~i-
'-J
o
<
\J. ,\
(L~
-X
0... ,-
~~ lU
t--.J
-t.-
==~
i'-..
sO
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
MEMORANDUM
690CiO' CmterDril'e. PO Box 147 TO:
Chill/hassen, Millllesot/l 55317
Phone 612.937.1900 FROM:
General Fax 612.937.5739
Ellgineering Fax 612.937.9152 DATE:
Public Sah)' Fax 612.934.2524
\\% u'u'/U.ci.chiuzlltWeii.Ii1/l.US SUBJECT:
Cindy Kirchoff, Planner I
Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official ~C{. K4
February 2, 1998
97-12 V AR revised (6711 Hopi Road, Mr. Dan Rutledge)
I was asked to review the revised variance proposal stamped for the above referenced project.
The applicant has proposed an alternate scenario in which the roof area adjacent to the
property line is cantilevered eight feet beyond the exterior wall.
Analvsis:
Building code requirements. The Uniform Building Code (UBe) classifies the garage as a U-
1 occupancy and provides requirements for fire-resistive construction and projection of
overhangs in proximity to property lines. The relationship between the building overhangs and
the property lines on the revised variance request is not clear, so I will list the code
requirements.
The UBC permits overhangs to extend one-third the distance to the property line or a
maximum of 12" into the area where openings are not permitted. In this case the building
code would permit the overhangs to be within 24" of the property line. The building code
does require projections in the area where openings are not permitted (anything within 36" of
the property line) to be of one-hour fire-resistive construction. The UBC has no requirements
for fire-resistive construction when exterior walls and overhangs are greater than three feet
from the property line.
An unsupported overhang of this magnitude will produce unusual stresses on the building
walls, roof and foundation. For this reason a structural engineer will be required to design the
bearing walls, truss attachments and foundation. The trusses must also be designed by an
engmeer.
Address numbers. The UBC and Chanhassen City Policy # 29-1992 requires address
numbers at least 5" high be placed on the garage wall facing the street.
Recommendations:
Should the revised variance be granted, the following conditions should be included:
TI". (ifl' of'(/'illlhilssm. :l(i'(i1i'iil~ C(lIili/llillit]' with c!Cdil !,lkc.i. I/wli::
iI,'!w7ilin'! dO/mtoll'lI. thril'ilW businesses. illl(lliftll'tifid [I,d.s. :1 ,ft',',I! ['.',1<'" [I
{nil!
Cindy Kirchoff, Planner I
February 2, 1998
Page 2
I. Exterior walls and overhangs shall comply with the provisions of the Uniform Building
Code.
2. The applicant shall engage a structural engineer to design the bearing walls, truss
attachments and foundation.
3. Address numbers complying with Chanhassen City Policy #29-1992 shall be installed on
the garage wall facing the street.
g :lsafelylsak\memoslplanlrutldge2