Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CAS-20_SONYA & SCOTT SCHROEDER (SOUTHVIEW DESIGN)
Non -Scannable item Item Description C- D -Folder Number ';i _ /� © ,.,-- ® Sonyyaa&ScottSchroeder(SoNhriawDeai n) - 2O Rneh!Drire zoai HaN SuHace Corerage VARIANCE Folder Name Job Number �) � a a a Box Number 0 C) 5 0 �`b i 0 The contents of this file have been scanned. Do not add anything to it unless it has been scanned. 07- .C;l o Building Inspections This letter is to confirm that on November 18, 2008, the following motion was Phone: 952.227.1180 adopted: "The Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-20 for a 2.6 percent Fax: 952.227.1190 hard surface coverage variance on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2"d Addition based on the staff report and the adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Action" Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (952) 227-1132 Fax: 952.227.1170 or aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. Relatme 0 0 Phone: 952.227.1140 November 26, 2008 CITY OF CHINNSEN Scott and Sonya Schroeder Phone: 952227.1120 2081 Pinehurst Drive 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 PO Boz 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 ec: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director Phone: 952.227.1400 Re: 2081 Pinehurst Drive Variance Request Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning Case #07-20 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Schroeder: Fax: 952227.1110 07- .C;l o Building Inspections This letter is to confirm that on November 18, 2008, the following motion was Phone: 952.227.1180 adopted: "The Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-20 for a 2.6 percent Fax: 952.227.1190 hard surface coverage variance on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2"d Addition based on the staff report and the adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Action" Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (952) 227-1132 Fax: 952.227.1170 or aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. Relatme Phone: 952.227.1140 Sincerely, Fax: 952.227.1110 Park R Recreation Phone: 952227.1120 Angie uA seth Fax: 952.227.1110 Planner I Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard ec: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director Phone: 952.227.1400 cc: Building File Fax: 952.227.1404 Tim Johnson, Southview Design X98 Natural Resources Phone: 9522271130 g.xplanx2007planning c \97-202081pinehurst hs varianc6denialletter.doc Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Ceow Phone: 9552.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Well Site www.d.chanhassen.mn.us Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND ACTION IN RE: Application of Southview Design for a 2.6%n hard surface coverage variance for the addition of patios and hardscape — Planning Case No. 07-20. On November 18, 2008, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the Application of Southview Design for a 2.6% hard surface coverage variance for the addition of patios and hardscape at 2081 Pinehurst Drive, located in the Single Family Residential District (RSF) at Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2"d Addition. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance that was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF). 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential —Low Density (Net Density Range 1.2 — 4u/Acre). 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2"d Addition. 4. 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 this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet these criteria. Finding. The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, a two -car garage, and the addition of a ten -foot by ten -foot patio could be constructed without a variance. The proposed use is not a reasonable use of the property; the additional 2.6% or 538.25 sq ft of impervious surface coverage will contribute to storm water quantity and quality problems. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. SCANNED Finding: The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the RSF zoning district. These conditions were discussed at length during the Planning Commission and City Council meetings when the development came in for preliminary and final plat approval. The development was replatted in 2006 and two lots were eliminated to increase the size of the lots. The lots are well over the minimum lot area requirement and have sufficient space to construct the desired home as well as other improvements to the property. Approval of this variance would create a precedence to grant other hard surface coverage variances in this development. 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 purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. However, the income potential maybe increased as an indirect result. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding: The alleged hardship of exceeding the maximum hard surface coverage is a self- created hardship. The homes on the lots are very large. However, there was an additional 600 square feet of allowable expansion possible after the initial approval of the building permit. 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 may be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located, in that additional storm water runoff is generated from the hard surface on the property. 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. Finding: 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. 5. The planning report #07-20 Variance dated November 18, 2008, prepared by Angie Auseth, et al, is incorporated herein. 0 0 ACTION The Planning Commission denies Planning Case #07-20 for a 2.6%n hard surface coverage variance on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2"d Addition, based these Findings of Fact. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 18th day of November, K11" PLANNING COMMISSION Its Chairman gaplan\2007 planning cases\07-20 2081 pinehurst hsc vatiance0indings of faclAm • 0 d-1-a-� CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 18, 2008 Chairman Papke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kurt Papke, Kevin Dillon, Kathleen Thomas, Debbie Larson, Mark Undestad, Denny Laufenburger, and Dan Keefe STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Angie Auseth, Planner; and Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: SCHROEDER VARIANCE: REOUEST FOR A HARD SURFACE COVERAGE VARIANCE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2081 PINEHURST DRIVE. APPLICANT: SOUTHVIEW DESIGN/SCOTT & SONYA SCHROEDER. PLANNING CASE 07-20. Public Present: Name Address Tim Johnson (Southview Design) 1875 East 50`h Street, Inver Grove Heights Scott Schroeder 2081 Pinehurst Drive Angie Auseth presented the staff report on this item. Papke: Kevin, anything? Dillon: So I remember this about a year or so ago. So then the lot that we recommended against the variance, did they go, they took out the stuff? Auseth: They did. Dillon: And they're now less than 25%? Auseth: Right at 24.9, yes. Dillon: Okay. So I mean we're going to ask questions of the applicant and all that stuff but you know just kind of processing here. It's going to be hard you know to determine that there wasn't a hardship. I mean we denied it. They must not have gone and appealed it to the City Council or whatever. They just kind of went along with the recommendation. Auseth: Right. W,PAN o Planning Commission Meeftg - November 18, 2008 • Dillon: And you know from that, I'm sure that was a hassle and everything, and then here comes another one and we just say yeah, sure. Fine. I mean I see a solution here but I guess we'll get to that. Keefe: Is the lot that they purchased, that's a buildable lot isn't it? Auseth: Yes. Keefe: Yeah. And what is the, well that's all I've got. Larson: Could you go back to the picture where you had the teal colors on it? Auseth: Sure. Larson: Okay. My question is, and then if you went to the very next one where it shows the breakdown of the percentages. Is it the fire pit that puts them over? Auseth: Right now they're at 24.9 percent so. Larson: Before these 3 things. Auseth: Yes. So all of these exceed. Larson: Oh, okay. That's all I have. Dillon: All of them together exceed or any one of them would? Auseth: Any one of them would. Laufenburger: So Angie if I read one of the items on the staff report. The amount that they exceed, or 2.6, is actually 538.25 square feet. Is that the right number? Auseth: Yes. Right here. Laufenburger: Okay. Thank you. Thomas: I don't have any questions. Papke: Could you refresh our collective memories as to why we removed the retaining walls from the impervious surface coverage. That made a pretty substantial change in the variance here. Auseth: Right. It was the width of retaining walls is not very large and in some cases a property needs to have a retaining wall to support the topography and by adding that in the hard cover it's reducing them from adding a patio or some other structure. It was just kind of getting onerous and very difficult to keep track of and calculate all the small strips that are shown on a survey. 1r .:.. oa Planning Commission Meeg - November 18, 2008 • Papke: Okay. Alright. With that if there is an applicant here tonight, we'd like you to step up and state your name and address and color in the lines for us. Scott Schroeder: I will. Good evening. I'm Scott Schroeder. The owner of 2081 Pinehurst. Part owner. My wife has the other. And we did in fact buy the property next door at this point kind of intending to keep it separate as an investment for potential future development. What staff did not mention as part of the previous discussion was that the staff didn't have at that time capability to investigate some of the hardscape, or permeable credits, or permeable advancements that have been made from an engineering perspective, and the, this committee had said can we, you know what are we going to do to investigate this. In our personal case what we had looked to do is have the fire pit installed. The rest of it maybe not, but we can't put a fire pit on that property and to put it on the other property would involve walking over there so we've kind of looked to do that. And I kept this open, much to Angie's chagrin, and I understand her perspective because she wanted to get through it. Awaiting to hear what we might do to invest in getting French drains and many of the other engineering solutions so we could afford another 200 square foot of fire pit. There's several other cities that have done this. Inver Grove and that that have investigated the options on this, and so I was looking forward to hearing tonight had the staff or city made any progress so that we could not violate and many conversations with Ojars, the other property, we would all like to make sure that we do not increase storm water runoff. It's not our intent as property owners to do that to our neighborhood, but if we're going to invest in engineering and all that to prevent that, we'd like to see there be a vehicle for us to be able to invest in the engineering to support it and then get the credits. Some partial credit for those investments. With that, Tim Johnson from Southview Design is here. He's had, done these applications in other cities and at your permission I'd like to have him talk about some of that stuff. Papke: Are these things that you're proposing that the City consider or, because right now we have to, the Planning Commission has to make a decision on the basis of the current code. Scott Schroeder: I understand. Papke: So you know we could certainly listen to it but you know we still have to make our ultimate decision on the basis of the way the code is written today. Just so you understand that. Scott Schroeder: I understand and expected that. Thank you. Tim Johnson: Good evening. Tim Johnson with Southview Design. Our address is 1875 East 501h Street, Inver Grove Heights. I guess this evening Mr. Schroeder and I are here to just follow up with where we left off last year. I think maybe not many of you but a few of you have mentioned last year that you folks might be interested in hearing the possibilities. We rolled out some great plans as far as an engineered drawing calculations, soil types, things like that that obviously were valuable for us to increase hard cover but at the same time improve the overall runoff. Without giving you much time to prepare for tonight's meeting with those documents, but just a quick refresher was the documents that we presented to you by a civil engineer, did calculations as far as the current runoff. Factors as far as current walkways, sidewalks, structures 3 Planning Commission Mee 9 -November 18, 2008 • of the home. Porch. Decks and so forth. With the calculations on the property that we talked about last year. We actually improved the actual overall runoff. As Mr. Schroeder mentioned, we don't want to increase the overall runoff for the ponds and for the neighborhood. We're very conscious about that. We want to make sure that we're making good decisions for the neighborhood and the development. We understand the, how sensitive this topic is for the development and we don't need to go down that road as far as what happened during the construction of this development. But what we are here to find out is, where is the City in the standing? Some other cities that I've worked with have allowed retention areas where we've taken the runoff from current home sites. Put them into the ground with engineer's help as far as calculating the amount of runoff that's being taken from a structure or home or driveways or patios and done testing to see okay. You've got this type of soil. This is what you're going to have as far as infiltration into the soils. Taking in the fact of construction, compaction, things like that. Pass them onto city's engineers. Had them review the plans. We go back. We're flexible. Again we're conscious. We want to make sure that we're going to be smart about lakes, ponds, runoff, things like that. This has been real successful for us. We've done 3 projects like this this year in the city of Inver Grove Heights, Roseville. We've worked in Minnetonka on a infiltration system. So these cities are obviously not completely all, 100% adopting them the way each different city has allowed it, but you know we've gone into permeable paver applications where you know how permeable pavers can be installed. Some cities are accepting it. Some aren't. It just depends upon the engineering and who's you know up designing these structures so with holding areas, retention ponds, rain gardens, you know how we use landscape materials and how they're designed and installed, obviously are a factor and we're very interested in working with the City and trying to help the Schroeder's in this case improve their property. They can't simply put a fire pit on the property the way it's standing today. Yeah, they could have made a smaller patio but then the smaller the patio, you know what's the use of having a patio if you can't enjoy it on there. You know so our goal here is to work with the city. Try to find the means of how we can come across with a good quality design so that we can you know improve the Schroeder's property without having to go into the secondary property. And I know in the past you guys mentioned that you're willing to work with us once you had someone staffed to fulfill the possible ideas that we have and review those and that's what we're after here this evening. Papke: City staff like to comment on any changes or any process that's being followed right now to amend anything that would be germane to this issue? Fauske: Certainly, thank you Chair Papke. Good evening members of the Planning Commission. Just to give you an update of where we're at with the discussion. Staff is anticipating early in 2009 talking to City Council about some of these infiltration practices that are out there. How it could be, if we would be willing to look at implementing something in the code with regards to impervious surface. The issues that we're contemplating on a staff level before we go to the council, what is the 100 year event? These porous pavers rain gardens are only good to help with a small event, an event of 2 inch rain. Not a 6 inch rain. So if you're looking at giving them some credit for some infiltration practices that only can accommodate a 2 inch event and you have a 6 inch event, you're, you need to look at our system as a whole and are we providing the safeguards necessary for a 100 year flood mitigation. That's one challenge. The other challenge, as you were aware of, several months ago Terry Jeffery, our Water rd ^Planning Commission Mee�ng - November 18, 2008 • Resources Coordinator was in front of you talking about our non -degradation plan and the goal of that plan is volume reduction of storm water runoff, and again we can get it for a small event, and this is a great way to start looking at it, but in a larger event we're not able to obtain that with some of these practices. And the other challenge would be the monitoring and compliance issues that would be associated with this. You know 2 years, 4 years, 6 years down the road, will these still be in place? Will they still be functioning? If we have a compliance issue, what are our roles as staff? What measures can we take to meet compliance so these are a lot of the challenges. I think everyone can appreciate that. It's not unfortunately not a very easy task to approach and there are a lot of complications and a lot of things we need to talk to once we get in discussions with City Council. Papke: So do you have a best guess as to when we might see some changes to the city code in this area? It sounds like you won't even have anything to consider until 2009 sometimes. Fauske: Correct. We're looking at early 2009 and looking for council's direction as far as you know how far do they want staff to look into this and also appreciating some of the regulatory standards that are coming down on a state and national level, is this something that we should be looking into. Papke: Thank you very much. Dillon: Are the things that you guys are going to consider, are they a part of what the applicant is going to consider in their changes to the property? Fauske: They certainly are. The things that the applicant's looking at doing are certainly a good volume reduction. The challenge is, is we need to look, volume reduction on a low, 2 inch event versus a 6 inch event. When we look at maximum impervious surface coverage. We need to find a balance and to be honest with you, Commissioner Dillon, we don't have a good answer for you right now. There's just so much, so many new technologies out there and so many regulations that we need to find a good balance between them, but certainly the things that they are looking at doing will help with volume reduction on a smaller event. But we need to also look at the larger rain events as well. Papke: So if I had to sum up what I heard is the applicant is, this has been tabled for about a year now with the applicant kind of waiting for the city to firm this up, and it sounds like we're nowhere near close to having anything you know predictable proximity that's really going to change here, so that could be another year. Fauske: That's correct Chair. Papke: Okay. Any questions for the applicant? Thomas: No. Laufenburger: None. Planning Commission Meeting - November 18, 2008 • Undestad: Just the lot line split or, that's not an option? You don't want to do that? Subdivide the two so you can. Scott Schroeder: It's definitely an option. We were interested to see after a year and a few months if anything had changed and clearly it hasn't so we'll have to... Papke: Okay. Any more questions? Okay. With that, if there's anyone from the public who would like to make any comments on this. We'd ask you to step up to the podium and state your name and address and tell us what you think. Seeing no one, we'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the Planning Commission for discussion and then we'll need a vote. Dillon: Kurt, I think you said it best. We have to make our recommendation based on the guidelines or the rules or whatever you want to call them that are in place today, and you know there doesn't seem to be a hardship demonstrated, which is one of the criteria for granting the variance. And also we've got a precedent set where we you know made someone go through a lot of work and expense to take out a non -conforming hard cover. So I think we'd be hard pressed to go ahead, and I personally would be very hard pressed to go ahead and support the granting of this variance based on the rules in place today and our previous actions. Larson: Pretty much I feel the same way. Our hands are kind of tied as far as what we can do. Unfortunately. Laufenburger: No other comment. Papke: Okay. I'll entertain a motion. Undestad: I'll make a motion. That the Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-20 for a 2.6 percent hard surface coverage variance on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2nd Addition based on the staff report and the adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Action. Papke: Is there a second? Larson: I'll second. Undestad moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07- 20 for a 2.6 percent hard surface coverage variance on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2nd Addition based on the staff report and the adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Action. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: AUTOBAHN MOTORPLEX: REOUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK CORRIDOR AND FOR MULTIPLE BUILDINGS (UP TO 14) ON ONE PARCEL TO PERMIT THE PHASED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT AND ALLOW FOR THE INCREMENTAL EXPANSION OR REVISION OF THE PROPERTY LINE ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF AUDUBON ROAD NORTH OF THE 0 v-1 <4 PROPOSED MOTION: "The Chanhassen Planning Commission denies Planning Case #07-20 for a 2.6% hard surface coverage variance on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2nd Addition, based on the staff report and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Action." SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Request for a 2.6% 44% variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage for the addition of patios and hardscape. LOCATION: 2081 Pinehurst Drive Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2°d Addition l d APPLICANT: Southview Design OWNER: Scott & Sonya Schroeder Tim Johnson 2081 Pinehurst Drive 1875 East 50d' Street Chanhassen, MN 55317 Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 PRESENT ZONING: Single -Family Residential (RSF) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential -Low Density (1.5 — 4 units per acre) ACREAGE: 0.47 acres DENSITY: N/A LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision. STAFF UPDATE This item was tabled at the September 4, 2007, Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant and staff to resolve the impervious coverage variance request. The Planning Commission was of the opinion that the applicant could and should reduce the impervious coverage and eliminate the variance request. The applicant has submitted building and zoning permit applications for a screened porch, deck, steps and patio, bringing the hard surface coverage to 24.9%. The applicant has installed these improvements on the site and chose to proceed with the request. This item was scheduled for the October 2, 2007, Planning Commission meeting. However, the applicant requested the item be removed from that agenda and waived the 120 -day review deadline. In order to bring this Planning Case to a conclusion, staff spoke with the applicant and scheduled the item for November 18, 2008. SCANNED 2081 Pinehurst Drive Variance Request Planning Case 07-20 Septeotb�00:7 November 18, 2008 Page 2 of 7 Since the September 4, 2007, Planning Commission meeting, at the direction of the City Council, staff has changed its policy of including retaining walls as part of the impervious surface calculations. This allows an additional 216 square feet of impervious expansion on the subject property. The applicant has also purchased the abutting property to the east. The applicant has installed landscaping on the property. The parcels are registered under two different parcel identification (PH)) numbers. However, should the property owner decide to combine the lots into a zoning lot (under one PID), the interior lot lines would be disregarded and the lot area would encompass both parcels, at which time the impervious coverage would no longer be an issue. Staff has attempted to gather updated information regarding the variance request from the applicant. However, the applicant has not responded to staffs request. Staff used the approved building and zoning permits, dated Approved 10/12/07, to calculate the hard surface coverage variance request. Based on this review, the request is for a 2.6% variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage for the additional hardscape on the property. PROPOSAL SUMMARY The property is zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF). It is located on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2°d Addition. Access to the site is gained off of Pinehurst Drive. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 27.6% 29.8,' hard surface coverage. The Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum of 25% hard surface coverage. The City received a building permit for the subject site that reflected a 22.1% hard surface coverage. The plans had adequate area to accommodate a future patio. The landscape contractor for this property is the same as the property located at 2101 Pinehurst Drive. The suaia:r contractor received notice that the Zoning Ordinance permits a maximum hard surface coverage of 25%. The contractor was aware that this site will face the same hard surface issues as the 2101 Pinehurst site and submitted a variance request for the subject site. The variance request for 2101 Pinehurst Drive was denied at the September 4, 2007, Planning Commission meeting. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Variance Request • Planning Case 07-20 wpcvmvornvoT November 18, 2008 Page 3 of 7 Staff is recommending denial of the applicant's request based on the fact that the applicant has reasonable use of the property with adequate outdoor expansion area and approval of this application could create a precedent. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20 Division 3. Variances Section 20-615 (4) RSF District Requirements; Hard Surface Coverage Sec 20-905 (6) Single-family dwellings. BACKGROUND The property is located on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2°d Addition, which is zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF). The subject property has an area of 20,507 square feet. It has a lot frontage of 107 feet and an average depth of 238.5 feet. Minimum lot dimensions required by ordinance are 15,000 square feet lot, 90 -foot lot frontage and 125 -foot lot depth. This lot exceeds the minimum requirements for the RSF zoning district. The maximum hard surface coverage in the RSF district is 25%. The hard cover limitations are necessary to limit the amount of surface water runoff. The amount of runoff and the time that runoff takes to reach a water body are both increased proportionately to increases in hard cover. This leads to increased pollutant loading, increased erosion, increased fluctuations in water levels within lakes and streams and other adverse effects. Chanhassen is unique in that there are eleven named DNR public waters and three named DNR public streams as well as the Seminary Fen. These resources, and the quality in which they exist, are an amenity which deserves protection for the benefit of all residents. Additionally, increases in the amount of runoff can result in deficiencies in the storm sewer infrastructure. This may result in surcharging of storm sewer as well as flooding of streets, yards and basements. Section 20-615 (5) limits the amount of hard cover to 25% to protect these resources and the existing infrastructure. In 2006 during the Public Hearing process for the Pinehurst Development, staff expressed concern with the potential hard surface coverage on some of the proposed lots. The developer submitted a sample of potential homes for the overall subdivision. Some of these homes were too large. As a result, staff recommended the applicant reduce the number of lots within the subdivision. In 2006, the applicant replatted the site from 43 lots to 41 lots to increase the lot size. Due to the size of the proposed homes on the lots, the developer was aware of the limited availability of additional square footage for any further improvements or additions on these parcels. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Variance Request • Planning Case 07-20 September --"ter November 18, 2008 Page 4 of 7 The building permit for the subject site was issued on February 1, 2007. It reflected a hard surface coverage of 22.1%(4522.3 sq R). This included the proposed home, driveway, and front sidewalk. The proposed 22.1% coverage allowed for future improvements, such as a patio. Based on the building permit application the its s __ _ C Meg .......�erl...•.e O�Oi�ii� _ 1%3 1 Gnu homeowner had an additional 604 square feet of hard surface for future expansion. On July 6, 2006, in an attempt to avoid future hard cover issues due to the increased size of homes on lots, the City amended Sec. 20-905; Single-family dwellings (6) to read: "Where access doors are proposed from a dwelling to the outdoors, which does not connect directly to a sidewalk or stoop, a minimum ten feet by ten feet hard surface area shall be assumed. Such surface area must be shown to comply with property line, lake and wetland setbacks; may not encroach into conservation or drainage and utility easements; and shall not bring the site's hard surface coverage above that permitted by ordinance." To accommodate this requirement, and at the recommendation of the Planning Commission at the September 4, 2007 meeting, the applicant submitted plans that meet the 25% hard surface coverage requirements. The screen porch, deck, steps for the retaining wall, and 270 square -foot paver patio connecting to the exiting door and extending under the deck and porch, was approved with a hard surface coverage of 24.9%. ct 2081 Pinehurst Drive Vari• Request • Planning Case 07-20 September 4-=007 November 18, 2008 Page 5 of 7 A Residential Zoning Permit was issued for the patio in conjunction with the building permit. ANALYSIS Y. Building Permit square feet Existing square feet Future Square feet Lot Area 20,507 20,507 20,507 House/Garage 3,088 3,088 3,088 Driveway 1,097 1,097 1,097 Front Porch 217 217 217 Front Walk 120 120 34-6305 Steps 54 Y. Back Porch 255 255 Back Patio 270 The applicant continues to pursue a variance request to increase the impervious surface coverage by 564 square feet, which will exceed the maximum 25% by 2.6%, which results in 538.25 square feet exceeding the maximum site coverage allowed by ordinance. This includes increasing the front walk from 120 square feet to 305 square feet and increasing the paver patio from 270 square feet to 407 square feet. Surface Building Permit square feet Existing square feet Future Square feet Lot Area 20,507 20,507 20,507 House/Garage 3,088 3,088 3,088 Driveway 1,097 1,097 1,097 Front Porch 217 217 217 Front Walk 120 120 34-6305 Steps 54 54 Back Porch 255 255 Back Patio 270 6-1.1407 Fire Pit 242 Retaining -Wall 24-6 24-6 Total HSC 4,522 5,101 "9615,665 Percentage 22.1% 24.9% 29.%27.6% Square footage exceeding 25% 538.25 or 2.6% Staff informed the developer of the hard cover issues during the subdivision process. Lennar Homes replatted Pinehurst 2"d Addition to eliminate two lots. It is the developer and real estate agent's duty to inform the prospective homeowner of any and all limitations on the site. Since Lennar Homes is also the builder, they were aware of the constraints on the property. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Vari• Request • Planning Case 07-20 septembeF 4, 2007 - November 18, 2008 Page 6 of 7 Due to the nature of the homes in this development, the expectation is to improve the exterior of the property with landscaping and hardscaping. Prospective homeowners should have been made aware of the impervious restrictions prior to building on these lots. In addition, all hardscape improvements require approval of a Residential Zoning Permit obtained by the homeowner or contractor. A residential zoning permit acts as a safety net to identify any potential code violations, such as setback encroachments and hard cover requirements, prior to construction. This permit is at no cost to the homeowner and allows the City and the homeowner an opportunity to correct any encroachments or violation before installation begins. It is the contractor/homeowner's responsibility to contact the City prior to construction and obtain a Residential Zoning Permit to ensure compliance with City Code. If a variance is granted from the 25% hard surface maximum, it may set a precedent in this neighborhood, as well as other neighborhoods, to apply for variances for hardscape improvements beyond the restrictions set forth in the City Code. Site Characteristics The topography of the site slopes significantly in the rear yard from a high of elevation of 1052.6 to 1040. 1, which constitutes a 12.5 -foot drop in a matter of 35 feet. A storm water pond is located outside of the property lines, just to the west of the rear yard of the property. The runoff from these lots will run directly into the storm water pond. While increasing the hard surface coverage for one lot may not impact the storm water pond significantly, increasing the hard surface coverage for a number of lots in this development will significantly impact the storm water system. The water from this pond eventually nms into the Minnesota River. According to the Hydrology Guide for Minnesota by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, the recommended hard surface coverage for a one-half acre (approximately 21,000 square foot) lot is 25%. This information is based on the Hydrologic Curve which translates to the amount of runoff produced from a particular surface. The Hydrologic Curve for the Pinehurst Subdivision is 72. This is consistent with the U.S.D.A Soil Conservation Service for soil types B and C, soils containing non -permeable material, such as clay. Permitted Use The site is zoned RSF, Single -Family Residential. Reasonable use of a property within the RSF district is a single-family home with a two -car garage. A single-family home with a three -car garage is currently constructed on the property. Even after the initial construction of the home, there was over 600 square feet of additional hard cover allowed on the property. It is staffs opinion that the homeowner has reasonable use of the property and has not demonstrated a hardship which would warrant granting of the variance request. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Variance Request Planning Case 07-20 Septemb��007- November 18, 2008 Page 7 of 7 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission denies Planning Case #07-20 for a 2.6% hard surface coverage variance on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2nd Addition, based on the staff report and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Action." ATTACHMENTS I. Findings of Fact and Action. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced copy of lot survey. 4. Reduced copy of hardscape design dated "Approved 10/12/07'. 5. Pinehurst Hydrograph Report—Drainage Area 10. 6. Drainage Map for Pinehurst 2°d Addition. 7. Hydrology Guide for Minnesota, figure 3-2. 8. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. 9. Extension Letter dated September 20, 2007. 10. Waiver Letter dated Received October 22, 2007. 11. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. G:\PLAN\2007PLmningCwm\07-202081 Pinehurst HSC Vatiance\11-18-08 2081 Pinehurst Vu ReportAm CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND ACTION IN RE: Application of Southview Design for a 2.6% hard surface coverage variance for the addition of patios and hardscape — Planning Case No. 07-20. On November 18, 2008, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the Application of Southview Design for a 2.6% hard surface coverage variance for the addition of patios and hardscape at 2081 Pinehurst Drive, located in the Single Family Residential District (RSF) at Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst tad Addition. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance that was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF). 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential — Low Density (Net Density Range 1.2 — 4u/Acre). 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst tad Addition. 4. 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 this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet these criteria. Finding: The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, a two -car garage, and the addition of a ten -foot by ten -foot patio could be constructed without a variance. The proposed use is not a reasonable use of the property; the additional 2.6% or 538.25 sq ft of impervious surface coverage will contribute to storm water quantity and quality problems. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. a • Finding. The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the RSF zoning district. These conditions were discussed at length during the Planning Commission and City Council meetings when the development came in for preliminary and final plat approval. The development was replatted in 2006 and two lots were eliminated to increase the size of the lots. The lots are well over the minimum lot area requirement and have sufficient space to construct the desired home as well as other improvements to the property. Approval of this variance would create a precedence to grant other hard surface coverage variances in this development. 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 purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. However, the income potential may be increased as an indirect result. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding. The alleged hardship of exceeding the maximum hard surface coverage is a self- created hardship. The homes on the lots are very large. However, there was an additional 600 square feet of allowable expansion possible after the initial approval of the building permit. 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 may be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located, in that additional storm water runoff is generated from the hard surface on the property. 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. Finding: 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. 5. The planning report #07-20 Variance dated November 18, 2008, prepared by Angie Auseth, et al, is incorporated herein. 2 0 ACTION 7 The Planning Commission denies Planning Case #07-20 for a 2.6% hard surface coverage variance on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2°d Addition, based these Findings of Fact. 6M ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 18d' day of November, CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MM Its Chairman gAplan\2007 planning ca \07-20 2091 pinehurst hsc variance0;ndings of fact.doc PLEASE PRINT r 0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Planning Case No. 017—ac CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED AUG 0 3 2007 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT Applicant Name and Address: Owner Name and Address: S�r;rtytG...) DcSibN Irl-f/k `I SCOTT �ttR�EVFEZ- I $?S E SoT St ZC I i� EDwave Gtzr7J N �t kTS IO11 CAAWAAITDrdM N — 3) -7 Contact: i r l v--" Contact. �-CyTf Sc tys-x�Dt�(z Phone:4,SI %5;451i'5 Fax: 0y -i 45S liZt Phone: 510 -115 7ZZei Fax: Email: {1d,nson �.4i�trw esi1'1-(,&4 Email: 1;.c - 5"eoL-Wy NOTE: Consultation with City staff is required prior to submittal, including review of development plans Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Interim Use Permit (IUP) Non -conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development* Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review (SPR)* Subdivision* Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC) Variance (VAR) Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign — $200 (City to install and remove) X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** - $50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes & Bounds - $450 Minor SUB TOTAL FEE $ An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant prior to the public hearing. *Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8%" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital copy in TIFF -Group 4 (*.tif) format. **Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. SCANNED PROJECT NAME:�PdX17E LA!"I.iPCPIr�C"5 LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: TOTALACREAGE: PUr17 WETLANDS PRESENT: _ '� YES NO PRESENT ZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: f r71 -20,-770 5F 't 1&6C-- 21--2005" 114Z3 5 � = Z-7.5 f 5 Aw Aw(rpr.,fe Z. 5 %v l 2o 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 this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 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 Owners Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to roceed with the y. The do menu and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowl� 7 Signature of Fee Owner 60-03 - 4L,>-7 Date Date SCA14NEU G:tpLAN\forms\Development Review Applirabon.DOC Rev. 12105 a- -• 1 I )h1 f-1 .x`-----1 c�otx z O f —�rxmt / ®wo Z 0 d 'QZ,ZibL :.:. _ iiOz3a� .soot of-o�zsu 00 m 5� tmt} � rix E � ~IsNz4Og I ob Z CC a- -• 1 I )h1 f-1 .x`-----1 c�otx z O f —�rxmt / ®wo Z 0 d 'QZ,ZibL :.:. _ iiOz3a� .soot of-o�zsu 00 m O w 4 j Y LL tmt} � rix 3oanGO n ~IsNz4Og I O 1 CC etm (100NNM) ntmtx �]!SnOH 03SO 08d I m.m t — .R _ b 0YA1 Jmt �� IS a 4 IL IL LLIi IL Ii ' ♦Zlol� Vi Vlmm NN 0 a »moo <'ao FFA E ;s A 1 I )h1 f-1 .x`-----1 c�otx td L —�rxmt / ®wo 'QZ,ZibL :.:. .soot .tet 1 b 0YA1 Jmt �� IS a 4 IL IL LLIi IL Ii ' ♦Zlol� Vi Vlmm NN 0 a »moo <'ao FFA E ;s A II 1 1 IJ 1 I I I Ip I I I I I I 1 ' I I 1 I I I I I I II I I I I ' I LANDSCAPE DESIGN FOR SCHROEDER RESIDENCE 2081 PINEHURST DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 _ • �A I APPROVED BYAl-1:11k DEPT.: Pian I APPROVED BYAl-1:11k DEPT.: Pian i DATE: 1DI1zj I BY: DEPT.: E� i� DATE: /pyZ-O i QEPi.: DATE: DESIGN INFORMATION SCALE REP:Tm .tAmm I REVISIONS 1' = B' " ASST;Mtr r,9m mmml VIT".I . rs $D�Y miwm rxmim o•s�c Hydrograph Report Hydrallow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 11 DA -10 Hydrograph type Storm frequency Drainage area Basin Slope Tc method Total precip. Storm duration = SCS Runoff = 100 yrs = 16.66 ac = 3.5% = LAG = 6.00 in = 24 hrs Hydrograph Discharge Table Time -- Outflow (hrs cfs) 12.10 49.96 << End Wednesday, Jul 6 2005, 9:12 AM Peak discharge = 49.96 cfs Time interval = 3 min Curve number = 72 Hydraulic length = 1100 ft Time of conc. (Tc) = 23.2 min Distribution = Type II Shape factor = 484 Hydrograph Volume = 4.052 acft ( Pnnteal values >= 100% of Op.) 13 r $ U a a S0q(ZCF_1."A�droVel e -�bY U V ID, 4 � Sol I Coy Sex Vi co FIGURE 3-2 MN -ENG -73 FIGURE S DEIMfMfNi OF .,GYCULiURE 9-76 s L CONZERVAE SERVICE (File Code ENG -13) HYDROLOGIC CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION SHEEP Moisture Condition II LAND USE FOR URBAN AREAS B Present or Future D Watershed Site D.A. Acres Computed by Date Checked by Date Total Acres Weighted Runoff Curve No, Product Total Total Acres - 3-4 Product Total !I Curve Numbers Acres Moisture Condition II A B C D LAND USE DESCRIPTION Per Practice Soils Soils Soils Soils Product Cultivated Land: without conservation treatment 72 81 88 91 with conservation treatment 62 71 78 81 Pasture or range land: poor condition 68 79 86 89 good condition 1 30 61 74 80 Meadow: good condition 30 58 71 78 Wood or Forest land: thin stand, poor cover, no mulch 45 66 77 83 good cover 25 55 70 77 Open Spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, ceme- teries, etc. good condition: grass cover on 754 or more of the area 39 61 74 80 fair condition: grass cover on 504 to 754 of the area 49 69 79 84 Com,ercial and business areas (854 impervious) 89 92 94 95 Industrial districts (724 impervious) 81 88 91 93 Residential: Average lot size Average 4 Impervious 118 acre or less 65 77 85 90 92 114 acre 38 61 75 83 87 173 acre (14,52051p) 30 57 72 81 86 112 acre (2j-7BD5�.) 25 54 70 80 85 1 acre 20 . 51 68 79 84 Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways, etc. 98 98 98 98 Streets and mads: paved with curbs and storm sewers 98 98 98 98 gravel 76 85 89 91 dirt 72 82 87 89 Marsh 8 85 85 Other Total Acres Weighted Runoff Curve No, Product Total Total Acres - 3-4 Product Total !I • • CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on August 23, 2007, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for 2081 Pinehurst Variance — Planning Case 07-20 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 2007. Notary ublic t KIM T. MEUWISSEN Notary Public in My commisaion UpM Jan 31, 2010 Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, September 4, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of theagenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Proposal: Request for a hard surface coverage variance Applicant: Southview Design Property 2081 Pinehurst Drive Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. 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 Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing through the following steps: at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. at the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/plan/07-20.htmI. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Questions & Auseth by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1131. If you choose to submit written Comments: comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Weiland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the Item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/industnal. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal, Staff is also available to review the project with any interested personms). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not, Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, September 4, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of theagenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Proposal: Request for a hard surface coverage variance Applicant: Southview Design Property 2081 Pinehurst Drive Location: A location map is on the reverse side of this notice. 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 Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: What Happens 1' Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. at the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. • 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/j)lan/07-20.htmi. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Auseth by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Questions & phone at 952-227-1131. If you choose to submit written Comments: comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notifie� application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercialfindustrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested personjs). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. • This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data locatetl in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this Map are ertor free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, treating or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in Me depiction of geographic features. H emom or discrepancies are found please contact 952-22]-11 D]. The preceding disdamer is provided W muant to Minnesota Statutes §408 03, Sum. 21 (2000), and Ne user of this map acknowledges that ate City shall not be liable for any damages, aro expressly waives all dans, and agrees to defend, indemnity, and had harmless the City from any and all dams brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arse out of the users access or use of data provided. utsciaimer This map is neither a legacy recorded map nor a sovay sent is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not wammt that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this rrep are error free, and the C% does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, trdddng or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precison in Me depiction of geographic featuresg ertors or discrepancies are found please contact 952-22]-110]. Thal preceding disclamer is prorde f pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §488.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages. and expressly v2nes alt darts. and agrees to defend, indermih. and hold hominess the CM from any and all darts brought by User, its employ. or agents, or third parties which area out of the users access or use of data provided. WILLIAM V & NANCY M SWEARENGIN MICHAEL J STACHOWSKI BRUCE A & JEAN A MATTSON TRUSTEES OF FAMILY TRUST 2050 CRESTVIEW DR 2020 CRESTVIEW DR 2080 CRESTVIEW DR EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8007 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8007 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8007 JUDITH ELAINE ALEXANDER XUEBING FENG & JAYSON C DREHER 2122 LAKE LUCY RD XIAOGUANG DENG 2144 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -6705 6724 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -6705 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -6700 WILLIAM F & JEANNE A KRAKE SANDRA L WELLS CHARLES R & BEVERLY J JACKSON 6739 MANCHESTER DR 2051 HIGHGATE CIR 2110 CRESTVIEW DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -6700 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -6704 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8009 TIMOTHY P & HEIDI S LARKIN & JOHN MARK & JANICE RAE MOBERG SCOTT D & CYNTHIA L BOEDDEKER LECY BROS CONSTRUCTION 6738 MANCHESTER DR 6710 MANCHESTER DR 2150 CRESEXCELSIOR, IEWMN DR 53 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -6700 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -6700 EXCELSIOR , MN 55331 -8009 PAUL S TUNGSETH DORIS L NIKOLAI ERIC W & GRETCHEN G LOPER 2051 CRESTVIEW DR TRUSTEE OF TRUST 2076 HIGHGATE CIR EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 46008 6570 GALPIN BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -6704 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8020 ROBERT A JR & BRENDA K NESS STEVEN S & LORI A ABBLETT COURTNEY W & CHRISTINE CLAFLIN 2121 CRESTVIEW DR 2081 CRESTVIEW DR 110655TH AVE S EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8010 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8008 FARGO , NO 58104 -8456 JEFFREY A JORGENSEN & DANIEL J DOHSE & HELENA B STAFKO MARKS LEE-DOHSE U S HOME CORP 935 EAST 2028 HIGHGATE CIR 2058 HIGHGATE CIR , MN 553991 -1849 BLVD WAYZATA, MN 55 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -6704 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -6704 THOMAS J WOODS ANDREW & DANA LUING PLOWSHARES DEVELOPMENT LLC 2031 EDGEWOOD CT 2020 EDGEWOOD CT 1851 WEST LAKE DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -4577 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -4577 STE 550 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8567 US HOME CORP & OJARS A PAPEDIS GMAC MODEL HOME FINANCE LLC PLOWSHARES DEVELOPMENT LLC TRUSTEE OF O PAPEDIS TRUST C/O US HOME CORP 935 EAST WAYZATA BLVD 2101 PINEHURST DR 935 WAYZATA BLVD E WAYZATA, MN 55391 -1849 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -4579 WAYZATA, MN 55391 -1849 RICHARD & MARIE JENNINGS SCOTT & SONYA SCHROEDER 2021 EDGEWOOD CT 2081 PINEHURST DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-4577 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 Public Hearing Notification Ar#a (500 feet) 2081 Pinehurst Drive City of Chanhassen Planning Case 07-20 est 65th Street res iew Dr Cres view r sae n m Gr, car � woo SUBJECT t U PROPERTY C Highgate Cir icy R04d 0 • CITY OF CHMNSEN September 20, 2007 1700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Southview Design Phone: Attn: Tim Johnson Fax: 952.227.1110 1875 E 50d' St Building Inspections Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 Re: Variance Application 2081 Pinehurst Drive — Planning Case 07-20 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Dear Tim: Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Your application was tabled at the September 10, 2007 Planning Commission Phone: 952227.1140 meeting. The 60 day review period will expire on October 2, 2007. The City will Fax: 952.227.1110 be unable to complete the review within 60 days of the original submittal (August Park a Recreation 3, 2007). This letter is to formally notify you that the City is taking the additional Phone: 952.227.1120 60 day extension to process this request as permitted under Minnesota Statute Fax 952.227.1110 15.99. Recreation Center - 2310Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952227.1400 Should you have an questions, lease feel free to contact me at 952 227-1132. Y Y q P ( ) Fax: 952.227.1404 Sincerely, Planning 8 Natural Resources'6 Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax 952.227.1110 1110 u" t� Angie Auseth Public Works 1591 Park Road Planner I Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us gAplan\2007 planning cases\07-20 2081 pinehurst hsc variance\60 day eztentim.doc SCANNED The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. 0 0 M -lc' RECEIVE® OCT 2 2 2007 C'ry 01- CH"'%HASSEN Angie Auseth City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Blvd. PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Planning Case #07-20, 2081 Pinehurst Drive Dear Ms. Auseth: SOUTH VIEW x This letter is to request that you delay scheduling Planning Case #07-20 until further notice. We understand that we must meet Planning Commission and City Council application deadline for resubmittal. We also understand that the city has a 60 day review deadline from the original submittal (August 3, 2007). This letter is to formally notify you that we will waive the 120 day deadline. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. M r NARI' Southview Design 1875 East 50th Street Inver Grove Heights Minnesota 55077 _1: Bast Metro 851-455-8238 nortn.e.t Metro 953-422-0188 eoute.est Metro 952-881-2298 iAX 851.455.1734 C9 cpFCS • Outdoor Living • Commercial & Residential • Professional Planning • Greenscapes • Wateracapes • Irrigation • Hardseapes • Concrete Pavers • Custom Services www.southviewdesign.00m SCANNED ICPI� c ,B 5IL°noN - <—_oF,wE rvnry Ames CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) 1, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on November 6, 2008, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for 2081 Pinehurst Variance — Planning Case 07-20 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. 41t� u en J. Eng h t, Depu Clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of O r , 2008. Nota Public KIM T. MEUWISSEN Notary Public -Minnesota 14� y Commission Expires Jan 31, 2010 Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later in the evening,depending on the order of theagenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Proposal: Request for a hard surface coverage variance Applicant: Southview Design/Scott & Sonya Schroeder Property 2081 Pinehurst Drive Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. 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 Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: What Happens 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. at the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/plan/07-20.htmi. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Auseth by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Questions & phone at 952-227-1131. If you choose to submit written Comments: comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Welland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that Includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial4ndustrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and Scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s), • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included In the report to the City Council, If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of theagenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Proposal: Request for a hard surface coverage variance Applicant: Southview Design/Scott & Sonya Schroeder Property 2081 Pinehurst Drive Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. 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 Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: What Happens W Wat 1 • Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. • 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/sery/plan/07-20.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Auseth by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Questions & phone at 952.227-1131. If you choose to submit written Comments: comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Cade Amendments require a public hearing before thegil Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notifie application in writing, Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commerciaUndustrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding Its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. 0 ulsclalmer This map is neither a legally recorded nap nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data locatetl in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, antl is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not wamam that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purpose repnnng exacting areasurement of distance or direction or pression in the degction of geographic features. M snore or discrepancies are found pease contact 952-227-1107. The Preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.03. Subtl. 21 (2000), and the user of this nap acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressfy waives all darts, and agrees to defend. indemnify, and hold himpless the City from any and all claims brought by flier, its employees or agents, or third parties xMich arise oN of the usees access or use of Mala provided. This rrrbp is neither a legally receded map nor a wrvey"is not intended to be used as one. This map is a composition of records, information and data located in vanws city. county. areae and federal offices and other sources regarding Me sea shown, atW is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error bee, and the City does not represent that the GtS Data can be used for navigational. traclung or any other purpose re9uinng exacting nteawrerrent of distance, or direction or pression in the depiction of geographic features. If ermre or discrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107 The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statules §466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not De liable for any damages, and expressly waives all darns, and agrees to defend. indemnify, and hstl harry ess the City from any and all Gains brought by User, its ertployees or agents, or third parties which arse out of the user's access or use of data Intended, 0 • WILLIAM V & NANCY M SWEARENGIN MICHAEL J STACHOWSKI BRUCE A & JEAN A MATTSON TRUSTEES OF FAMILY TRUST 2050 CRESTVIEW DR 2020 CRESTVIEW DR 2080 CRESTVIEW DR EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8007 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8007 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8007 JOHN M & NICOLE L THAYER XUEBING FENG & JAYSON C DREHER 2122 LAKE LUCY RD XIAOGUANG DENG 2144 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -6705 6724 MANCHESTER DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -6705 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -6700 WILLIAM F & JEANNE A KRAKE SANDRA L WELLS CHARLES R & BEVERLY J JACKSON 6739 MANCHESTER DR 2051 HIGHGATE CIR 2110 CRESTVIEW DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -6700 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -6704 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8009 TIMOTHY P & HEIDI S LARKIN & JOHN MARK & JANICE RAE MOBERG SCOTT D & CYNTHIA L BOEDDEKER LECY BROS CONSTRUCTION 6738 MANCHESTER DR 6710 MANCHESTER DR 2150 CRESTVIEW DR CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -6700 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -6700 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -6009 PAUL S TUNGSETH DORIS L NIKOLAI ERIC W & GRETCHEN G LOPER 2051 CRESTVIEW DR TRUSTEE OF TRUST 2076 HIGHGATE CIR EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 41008 6570 GALPIN BLVD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -6704 EXCELSIOR. MN 55331 -8020 ROBERT A JR & BRENDA K NESS STEVEN S & LORI A ABBLETT MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REG SYST 2121 CRESTVIEW DR 2081 CRESTVIEW DR C/O COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS INC EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8010 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -8008 7105 CORPORATE DR PTX C 35 PLANO . TX 75024 -4100 MARK A & MICHELE K METTERT DANIEL J DOHSE & U S HOME CORP 2028 HIGHGATE CIR MARIT S LEE-DOHSE 935 EAST WAYZATA BLVD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -6704 2058 HIGHGATE CIR WAYZATA , MN 55391 -1849 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -6704 THOMAS J WOODS ANDREW & DANA LUING PLOWSHARES DEVELOPMENT LLC 2031 EDGEWOOD CT 2020 EDGEWOOD CT 1851 WEST LAKE DR #550 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -4577 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -0577 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -8567 TODD R & AMY A GLEASON LEIGH STOCKER BERGER OJARS A PAPEDIS 2111 PINEHURST OR 2140 PINEHURST DR TRUSTEE OF O PAPEDIS TRUST CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -4579 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -4579 2101 PINEHURST OR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -4579 DOUGLAS G & SARAH P HIPSKIND S R SOMURI & KEITH K & CHRISTINE M CLARK 2061 PINEHURST DR NISHA AGRAWAL 3750 RED CEDAR POINT RD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -4578 2091 PINEHURST DR EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -9675 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -4578 E RICHARD & MARIE JENNINGS SCOTT D & SONYA B SCHROEDER 2021 EDGEWOOD CT 2081 PINEHURST DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-4577 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-4578 0 0 • Affidavit of Publication Southwest Newspapers RATE INFORMATION Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space.... $40.00 per column inch Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ................................ $40.00 per column inch Rate actually charged for the above matter ............................................... $12.19 per column inch State of Minnesota) )SS. CITY OF CHANHASSEN County of Carver ) CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNI7-20 CASE BYO. GIVEN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE Mark Weber, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is the publisher or the authorized agent of the that the Chanhassen Planning PVillager and has publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Commission will hold a public full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: hearing on Tuesday, November 18, 2008, at 7:00 P.M. in the Council (A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331 A.02, 331 A.07, and other applicable laws, as 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of amended. this hearing is to consider a request foron (B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No. '//36, proharertysurfalocated at 2081 on property located at 2081 Pinehurst Drive. Applicant: was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said Schroeder. Design/Scott &Sonya Notie is hereb incorporated as art of this Affidavit.Said notice was cut from the columns of p Schroeder. the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both s A plan showing the location of inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition the proposal is available for public and publication of the Notice: review on the City's web site at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/sm/ at City Hall during abcdefghijklmnopgrstuvwxyz during regular business hours. All regular si interested persons are invited to hearing Vdi �411 attend this public and By; express their opinions with respect Mark Weber to this proposal. Angie Auseth, Planner I Email: aansethCaci chanhassen.mmus Subscribed and sworn before me on Phone: 952-227-1132 (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on Thursday, November 6, 2008; No. 4136) this &n ' day of A1oVA ,h, , 2008 LAURIE A. HARTMANN NOTARY PUBt10 - MA*UE90TA MY C`i-wwion Fvwa in. at, 2010 Notary Public RATE INFORMATION Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space.... $40.00 per column inch Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ................................ $40.00 per column inch Rate actually charged for the above matter ............................................... $12.19 per column inch E 0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO. 07-20 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, November 18, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for a hard surface coverage variance on property located at 2081 Pinehurst Drive. Applicant: Southview Design/Scott & Sonya Schroeder. A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review on the City's web site at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/plan/07-20.html or at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. Angie Auseth, Planner I Email: aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Phone: 952-227-1132 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on November 6, 2008) SCANNED Auseth, Angie From: Schroeder, Scott (MN10) [Scott.Schroeder@Honeywell.com] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 2:28 PM To: Auseth, Angie Subject: RE: Variance Request Angie, Thank you for the clarification. I look forward to the discussion and staff presentation on the 18th. Best regards, Scott Schroeder From: Auseth, Angie [mailto:aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 2:13 PM To: Schroeder, Scott (MN10) Subject: FW: Variance Request Scott, I would like to clarify the role of the Planning Commission (Board of Appeals and Adjustments) as it relates to variance requests: Decisions of the board. The board shall be empowered to decide appeals and grant variances, other than variances in conjunction with platting, site plan review, conditional use permits and interim use permits, when the decision of the board is by an affirmative vote of three-fourths of the members present. A vote of less than three-fourths of the members present or any vote on a variance in conjunction with platting, site plan review, conditional use permits and interim use permits shall serve only as a recommendation to the city council, who shall then make the final determination on the appeal or variance request within 30 days after receipt of the board's action. If the board recommends approval, it may also recommend appropriate conditions. The board shall act upon all appeals and variance requests within 15 days after the date of the close of the required hearing. Appeal from decisions of the board. A city council member, the applicant, or any aggrieved person may appeal such decision to the city council by filing an appeal with the community development director within four days after the date of the board's decision. Council action. By majority vote, the city council may reverse, affirm or modify, wholly or partly, the decision appealed from the board, and to that end the city council shall have all the powers of the board, or the city council may approve or deny the variance request. The council shall decide all appeals within 30 days after the date of the required hearing thereon. In granting any variance, the city council may attach conditions to ensure compliance with this chapter and to protect adjacent property. When it comes to amending city ordinances, as would be the situation with developing standards for pervious surfaces, the Planning Commission is a recommending body to the City Council. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Angie Angie Auseth Planner I •CANNED City of Chanhassen • • 7700 Market Blvd Chanhassen, MN 55317 Direct dial: 952-227-1132 Fax: 952-227-1110 email: aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Website: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us From: Auseth, Angie Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 11:26 AM To: 'scott.schroeder@honeywell.com' Cc: Jeffery, Terry Subject: RE: Variance Request Scott, Your variance request is scheduled for the November 18`h Planning Commission meeting agenda. Prior to that meeting, staff will update the staff report with any changes to the request. At the meeting you will have the opportunity to present your request to the Planning Commission, following staff's presentation; much like the previous Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission is a recommending body for the City Council and cannot approve a hard surface coverage variance based on previous surfaces. The City Code does not have standards for pervious surfaces that would provide a crediting system in lieu of impervious coverage. Staff is studying this issue and continuing to work toward a solution to this dilemma. If you would like to discuss this further you may contact Terry Jeffery, Water Resources Coordinator, at 952-227-1168. The City Code requires a review of all properties within 500 ft of the subject site to recognize any preexisting standards within developed neighborhoods. I can supply you with the specifics for the requests within 500 ft of your property. However, your request is for hard surface coverage variances within a two mile radius of your property. I can supply you with a list of all of the variance requests within that distance. From that list , you can request the files you would like staff to pull; and we can set up a time for you to come into City Hall and review them at your leisure. Please let me know what you would prefer as well as an update of any changes to your variance request. Sincerely, Angie Angie Auseth Planner I City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Blvd Chanhassen, MN 55317 Direct dial: 952-227-1132 Fax: 952-227-1110 email: aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Website: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us From: Schroeder, Scott (MN10)[mailto:Scott.Schroeder@Honeywell.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 4:03 PM To: Auseth, Angie • • Subject: RE: Variance Request Angie, Thank you for reaching out to me on email. I received your letter and have been talking with Southview intermittently on our next steps. In the meeting in August, the planning commission alluded to the fact that it wasn't prepared to take on a discussion of impermeable coverage credits until the staff had replaced an expert who could provide adequate evaluation. I feel somewhat railroaded that there isn't an option based on the planning commission's commentary on my neighbors request. Can the variance be modified or opened to a dialogue to elicit the commissions' requirements to grant impermeable coverage credit for use of landscaping technology such as French drains? Can I also formally request impermeable coverage variance's that have been granted to homeowners within a 2 mile radius of my house? Upon your response, I can evaluate my options on next steps. Best regards, Scott From: Auseth, Angie [maitto:aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 4:16 PM To: Schroeder, Scott (MN10) Subject: Variance Request Mr. Schroeder, I am following upon your variance request form 2007. It is staff's intent to come to a decision regarding the variance request, be it withdrawing the application or bringing it back to the Planning Commission for their decision. I have attached the notice I mailed to you August for your reference. I have not heard back from you as to the direction you would like to proceed. Please contact me as soon as possible so staff can plan accordingly. Sincerely, Angie Angie Auseth Planner I City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Blvd Chanhassen, MN 55317 Direct dial: 952-227-1132 Fax: 952-227-1110 email: aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Website: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us Dear Mr. and Mrs. Schroeder. Administration Phone: 952 227.1100 This letter is to inform you that there is an open variance application for hard surface Fax: 952.227.1110 coverage on your property located at 2081 Pinehurst Drive located in Pinehurst 2"d Building Inspections Addition. This application was tabled at the September 4, 2007 Planning Phone: 952.227.1180 Commission meeting. The 120 -day review deadline was formally waived by you on Fax: 952.227.1190 October 22, 2007. BO*94 0 Phaie:952227.1160 August 20, 2008 CITY OF City in writing as to the direction you would like to proceed. You may either CINIASSEN Scott & Sonya Schroeder 2081 Pinehurst Drive 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 PO Boz 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Variance Application for 2081 Pinehurst Drive — Planning Case 07-20 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Schroeder. Administration Phone: 952 227.1100 This letter is to inform you that there is an open variance application for hard surface Fax: 952.227.1110 coverage on your property located at 2081 Pinehurst Drive located in Pinehurst 2"d Building Inspections Addition. This application was tabled at the September 4, 2007 Planning Phone: 952.227.1180 Commission meeting. The 120 -day review deadline was formally waived by you on Fax: 952.227.1190 October 22, 2007. BO*94 This application has been unresolved for nearly 12 months. The City's intent is to Phaie:952227.1160 bring this application to conclusion before the end of this year. Please notify the Fax: 952.227.1170 City in writing as to the direction you would like to proceed. You may either Finance withdraw the application or proceed with the application and receive a decision on Phone: 952.227.1140 the variance request. Far 952.227.1110 Robert Generous, Senior Planner Fax: 952.227.1110 If the City does not receive a response to this letter by September 19, 2008, the Park & Recreation application will be placed on the October 21, 2008 Planning Commission meeting Phone: 952227.1120 agenda for a decision. Fax: 952.227.1110 Roger Knutson, City Attorney Recreation Center If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to 2310 Coulter Boulevard contact me at (952) 227-1132. Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Sincerely, Planning Natural Resources Phan: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Angie Auseth Planner I Public Warks 1591 Park Road AA:ktm Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax:952.227.1310 ec: Kate Aanenson AICP, Community Development Director Senior Center Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Phone: 952.227.1125 Robert Generous, Senior Planner Fax: 952.227.1110 Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner Terry Jeffery, Water Resources Coordinator Web She Joseph Shamla, Project Engineer www.d.chanhasserinn.us Roger Knutson, City Attorney wAplanx2007 planning casesx07-20 2081 pinehurst hsc variancexapphcatian status.doc SCANNED Chanhassen is a Community for Life - ',ending for Today and Planning for Tomorrow ADDRESS PIN LEGAL DESC PERMIT TYPE PROPERTY TYPE CONSTRUCTION TYPE ACTIVITY &ITY OF CHANHASSEN 7 MARKET BLVD - PO BOX 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1180 FAX: (952) 227-1190 REPRINTED ON 10/12/2007 : 2081 PINEHURST DR : 256120250 : PINEHURST : LOT 25 BLOCK 1 : PLANNING : RESIDENTIAL : ZONING : PATIO NOTE: INSALLATION OF 270 SQ FT PATIO AND LANDSCAPING 10/12/07, APPROVED, TO ENG. ANA 10-12-07, APPROVED, TO BLDG. SKLZ (TREES IN ESMT. OK BY PLANNING) APPLICANT SOUTHVIEW DESIGN 1875 E 50TH ST INVER GROVE HEIGHTS, MN 55077- (651) 7554513 SCOTT & SONYA SCHROEDER 2081 PINEHURST DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 - AGREEMENT AND SWORN STATEMENT The work for which this permit is issued shall be performed according to: (1) the conditions of this permit; (2) the approval plans and specifications; (3) the applicable city approvals, Ordinances, and Codes; and (4) the State Building Code. This permit is for only the work described, and does not grant permission for additional or related work which requires separate permits. This permit will expire and become null and void if work is not started within 180 days, or if work is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days any time after work has commenced. The applicant is responsible for assuring all required inspections are requested in conformance with the State Building Code. Issued by: lerritt Mohn, Building Official City of Chanhassen PAID WITH CHECK # OP- z0 •PERMIT NO.: 2007-02517 DATE ISSUED: 10/12/2007 1ILil"I SEPARATE PERMITS REQUIRED FOR WORK OTHER THAN DESCRIBED ABOVE. ttcnr,W • • I LFLI. Prbu• I Allmm'. �mL mer.me L ele sH sl..lm 9Fevro , Awum o -me.. swa.x..v (95g1. srL) M1MwI YYIPIe L PPI• ( Ilauv 196 eH 9..w e.n9� I &AIrRY Ilwwr' Pml•Pla s P.m -I. o,oq.r , uqw F.LI..9 owluy LmWeq LYnW —� II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I LANDSCAPE DESIGN FOR SCHROEDER RESIDENCE 2081 PINEHURST DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 e AMW elm Y 11 ad-s..M1e.e almdne F.sa Aulu,n BYlllm.a � r1uY.r.1r (OxnP) p 14sm Rpvl Ibb 13 14Tp/ RHun. �.IYeIY AF FA 4L[YIATIRI9 —SITT�Tf T•Itl LHS H I I I i I I I I I I I I 1,77 H LAM•Ilrw� I�dl A R•Ib, e,666H •k Pw� bdM FLAIL PucF al] H P14 I1" •I I I� I I qy+f�' �ILq if• oRa1Ll 9As1M i e -/d � (^ � I I I I I ® II it Iwn:avow o,vo I I IH OO iMe I I IanaO AF FA 4L[YIATIRI9 —SITT�Tf T•Itl LHS H I 1,77 H LAM•Ilrw� I�dl A R•Ib, e,666H FLAIL PucF al] H P14 I1" •I I I� ]b ekPu H qy+f�' �ILq if• �k TMT P ]65•]]a •I M.M 5]fl i e -/d � (^ � I . dulN .1.1. 1� a ,I (Ps GH AppwN) Msrlfk9. ,OS H (Cmi M Y`IIW FmlcuJ, I rAT ia112'� I &A,�p y r.0 Lu rr�nun]-I�nl nnnL r } _. Mr HHImI1Mw cIDESIGN/SALES REP:Tim JoFff n mr pm^en.e. DESIGN/SALESASST:Mwc Mc5hme CT IGn. STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for a4.6% 4.4 o variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage for the addition of patios and hardscape. LOCATION: 2081 Pinehurst Drive 6� Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2' Addition APPLICANT: Southview Design OWNER: Scott & Sonya Schroeder Tim Johnson 2081 Pinehurst Drive 1875 East 50`h St. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 PRESENT ZONING: Residential Single Family (RSF) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density ACREAGE: 0.47 acres DENSITY: NA SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a 4.6% 4$% impervious surface variance for the addition of patios and hardscape. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi judicial decision. feANNEG F ""MAO. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Vari• Request • Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 2 of 8 PROPOSAL SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 29.6% �°k hard surface coverage. The Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum of 25% hard surface coverage. Thegroperty is zoned Residential Single Family (RSF). It is located on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2 Addition. Access to the site is gained off of Pinehurst Drive. This item was tabled a the September 4, 2007 Planning Commission meeting to allow the developer to work with staff to try and resolve the variance. S"Wr The City received a building permit for the subject site that reflected a 22.1 % hard surface coverage. The plans had adequate area to accommodate a future patio. The landscape contractor for this property is the same as the property located at 2101 Pinehurst Drive. The contractor received notice that the Zoning Ordinance permits a maximum hard surface coverage of 25%. The contractor was aware that this site will face the same hard surface issues as the 2101 Pinehurst site and submitted a variance request for the subject site. The City has subsequently received a permit application for a screened porch, deck, retaining walls, steps and landing, bringing the hard surface coverage to 24.9% Staff is recommending denial of the applicant's request based on the fact that the applicant has reasonable use of the property with adequate outdoor expansion area and approval of this application will could a precedent. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20 Division 3. Variances 2081 Pinehurst Drive Vari• Request • Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 3 of 8 Section 20-615 (4) RSF District Requirements; Hard Surface Coverage Sec 20-905 (6) Single-family dwellings. BACKGROUND The property is located on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2" d Addition, which is zoned Residential Single Family (RSF). The subject property has an area of 20,507 square feet. It has a lot frontage of 107 feet and an average depth of 238.5 feet. Minimum lot dimensions required by ordinance are 15,000 square feet lot, 90 -foot lot frontage and 125 -foot lot depth. This lot exceeds the minimum requirements for the RSF zoning district. The building permit for the subject site was issued on February 1, 2007. It reflected a hard surface coverage of 22.1% (4522.3 sq ft). This included the proposed home, driveway, and front sidewalk. The maximum impervious surface in the RSF district is 25%. The proposed 22.1 % coverage allowed for future improvements, such as a patio. Based on the building permit application, the homeowner would have had an additional 604 square feet of hard surface for future expansion. T4f r E MIpCOy. R1FY �� KNI . 1'T.LF. m!N".Yt ®LF M�1yVp -..yylt��R ggaz�,. KL'ytEl1 r y„!%JTEI: N'Vfl P1.1 Z oO165LS1.li NWIIM . QSI £}:I.ia1lM. AtU NLYIiY MMl619 },mO IYEC�YP MC WIYu[ r p�'.VY YdtTAt&l NFLY'WW�V Ai41N1. M1t ,p �gdnYLM1.SiLSD 14Y WB1Yl 1!II'Q 'yO"—K--Kt F ij VJJMI'NIX191�L fYVLE Sq �'�--L��— NA"u. b.cr.sa v�F.o iFfon r a�nm�M� WAYIwI.IM I^/R.nPI<�aY>•��V �x..vtat�esnwYemM1:�Yesbrtsarr..Ms.W ianetuvnctsF..TUI Af.�o..aweam m.w..q '.Yltaryr■.np.ra•s�o:ra4u�w.gam w.Ywm��–. �uRr.�utaW bMr.. r.'etl.nr�feFL�W.Yifr�e.f W�aru.�+prattwaw.rnn.s� rw�M�Yf�arnsPM� �snwaanaMv.. +uW�. y�w��wpar n.naren�nws.Vcrf „ �atno'a1� dMn IMX Lp� '1 tE1L•�C' _ l /'� t. wi � �nh:.9f0 Wt LAIA�AiaRi KVI �"4 •urea .xs ... .. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Vari• Request • Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 4 of 8 In 2006 during the Public Hearing process for the Pinehurst Development, staff expressed concern with the potential hard surface coverage on some of the proposed lots. The developer submitted a sample of potential homes for the overall subdivision. Some of these homes were too large. As a result, staff recommended the applicant reduce the number of lots within the subdivision. In 2006, the applicant replatted the site from 43 lots to 41 lots to increase the lot size. Due to the size of the proposed homes on the lots, the developer was aware of the limited availability of additional square footage for any further improvements or additions on these parcels. In an attempt to avoid future hard cover issues due to the increased size of homes on lots, on July 6, 2006, the City amended Sec. 20-905: Single-family dwellings (6) "Where access doors are proposed from a dwelling to the outdoors, which does not connect directly to a sidewalk or stoop, a minimum ten feet by ten feet hard surface area shall be assumed. Such surface area must be shown to comply with property line, lake and wetland setbacks; may not encroach into conservation or drainage and utility easements; and shall not bring the site's hard surface coverage above that permitted by ordinance." The applicant has submitted plans that show a 60 square -foot paver landing to accommodate this requirement so the building permit for the screened porch and deck could be approved. A Residential Zoning Permit for the 60 square- foot paver landing was issued for the property in conjunction with the building permit. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a 4.6% 441% hard surface coverage variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage. The lot area is 20,507 square feet. Based on the 25% maximum coverage allowed, the home, driveway, walkway, etc. may occupy 5126.75 square feet. The remaining impervious surface allowed was 604.75 square feet. 4he-prspeeed hff Since the variance was tabled at the Planning Commission meeting on September 4, 2007, and with the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the applicant has submitted plans that meet the 25% hard surface coverage requirements. The screen porch, deck, retaining wall, steps for the retaining wall, and 60 square -foot paver pad were approved with a hard surface coverage of 24.9%. However, the applicant continues to pursue a variance request to increase the impervious surface coverage by 967 square feet, 4.6% over the 25% maximum. This includes increasing the front walk from 120 square feet to 305 square feet and adding a 540 square - foot patio extending out from the screened porch, under the deck and connecting the deck stairs to the 60 square -foot paver landing. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Vari• Request • Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 5 of 8 Surface Building Permit Square Feet Currently on Property Proposed Square Feet House/Garage 3,088 3,088 3,088 Driveway 1,097 1097 X581,097 Front Porch 217 217 217 Front Sidewalk 120 120 34-6305 Screen Porch 255 255 Patio "4.540 Retaining Wall 216 216 Steps 54 54 Fire it/Patio 242 Rear Brick Paver Landing 60 60 Total 4,522 or 22.1% 5,107 or 24.9% 6,057 er29,5949 6,074 or 29.6% Staff informed the developer of the hard cover issues during the subdivision process. Lennar Homes replatted Pinehurst 2°d Addition to eliminate two lots. It is the developer and real estate agent's duty to inform the prospective homeowner of any and all limitations on the site. Since Lennar Homes is also the builder, they were aware of the constraints on the property. Due to the nature of the homes in this development, the expectation is to improve the exterior of the property with landscaping and hardscaping. Prospective homeowners should have been made aware of the impervious restrictions prior to building on these lots. In addition, all hardscape improvements require approval of a Residential Zoning Permit obtained by the homeowner or contractor. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Variance Request • Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 6 of 8 A residential zoning permit acts as a safety net to identify any potential code violations, such as setback encroachments and hard cover requirements, prior to construction. This permit is at no cost to the homeowner and allows the City and the homeowner an opportunity to correct any encroachments or violation before installation begins. It is the contractor/homeowner's responsibility to contact the City prior to construction and obtain a Residential Zoning Permit to ensure compliance with City Code. If a variance is granted from the 25% hard surface maximum, it may set a precedent in this neighborhood, as well as other neighborhoods, to apply for variances for hardscape improvements beyond the restrictions set forth in the City Code. Site Characteristics The topography of the site slopes significantly in the rear yard from a high of elevation of 1052.6 to 1040. 1, which constitutes a 12.5 -foot drop in a matter of 35 feet. A storm water pond is located outside of the property lines, just to the west of the rear yard of the property. The runoff from these lots will run directly into the storm water pond. While increasing the hard surface coverage for one lot may not impact the storm water pond significantly; increasing the hard surface coverage for a number of lots in this development will significantly impact the storm water system. The water from this pond eventually runs into the Minnesota River. According to the Hydrology Guide for Minnesota by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, the recommended hard surface coverage for a one-half acre (approximately 21,000 square foot) lot is 25%. This information is based on the Hydrologic Curve which translates to the amount of runoff produced from a particular surface. The Hydrologic Curve for the Pinehurst Subdivision is 72. This is consistent with the U.S.D.A Soil Conservation Service for soil types B and C, soils containing non -permeable material, such as clay. Permitted Use The site is zoned RSF, Residential Single Family. Reasonable use of a property within the RSF district is a single-family home with a two -car garage. A single-family home with a three -car garage is currently constructed on the property. Even after the initial construction of the home, there was over 600 square feet of additional hard cover allowed on the property. FINDINGS The Planning Commission 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 this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet these criteria. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Variance Request • Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 7 of 8 Finding. The literatenforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, a two -car garage, and the addition of a ten -foot by ten -foot patio could be constructed without a variance. The proposed use is not a reasonable use of the property; the extra 4.6% impervious surface coverage will contribute to storm water quantity and quality problems. 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 conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the RSF zoning district. These conditions were discussed at length during the Planning Commission and City Council meetings when the development came in for preliminary and final plat approval. The development was replatted in 2006 and two lots were eliminated to increase the size of the lots. The lots are well over the minimum lot area requirement and have sufficient space to construct the desired home as well as other improvements to the property- C. rolerty 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 purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. However, the income potential may be increased as an indirect result. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding: The alleged hardship of exceeding the maximum hard surface coverage is a self- created hardship. The homes on the lots are very large. However, there was an additional 600 square feet of allowable expansion possible after the initial approval of the building permit. 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 may be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located, in that additional storm water runoff is generated from the hard surface on the property. 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 of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Finding: 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. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Vari • Request Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 8 of 8 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission denies Variance 07-20 for a 4.6% 47M hard surface coverage variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage in Pinehurst 2°d Addition." ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced copy of lot survey. 4. Reduced copy of hardscape design. 5. Pinehurst Hydrograph Report—Drainage Area 10. 6. Drainage Map for Pinehurst 2nd Addition. 7. Hydrology Guide for Minnesota, figure 3-2. 8. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. 9. Extension Letter dated September 20, 2007. gAplan\2001 planning case W-20 2081 pinehurst hsc vanance\2081 pinehurst var report.doc 6'1 - 2-C)Planning Commission Meeting - September 4, 2007 • McDonald: Can I have a second? Dillon: Second. Undestad moved, Dillon seconded that the Planning Commission denies Variance #07-19 for a 7.4% hard surface coverage variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage in Pinehurst 2°d Addition with the following condition: The hard surface coverage of the site shall not exceed 25%. All voted in favor except Larson who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. McDonald: And again, you do have the right of appeal to take this up to City Council and present the issue there. City Council does have the ability to waive our city ordinances as they see fit. So okay. PUBLIC HEARING: SCHROEDER VARIANCE: REOUEST FOR VARIANCE TO HARD SURFACE COVERAGE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2081 PINEHURST DRIVE. APPLICANT. SOUTHVIEW DESIGN, PLANNING CASE 07-20. Public Present: Name Address Tim Johnson, Southview Design Scott Schroeder Scott Boeddeker 1875 E. 50th Street, Inver Grove Heights 2081 Pinehurst Drive 6710 Manchester Drive Angie Auseth presented the staff report on this item. McDonald: Mark. Undestad: No questions. McDonald: Dan. Keefe: Well in this case anything hasn't been built yet, is that correct? Auseth: Correct, it's not installed. Keefe: Yeah. McDonald: Kevin. 011 SCANNED Planning Commission Mcog - September 4, 2007 • Dillon: And so then the only thing is just the house and the driveway. Auseth: And the sidewalk. The sidewalk that was proposed with the building plan which was 120 square feet as opposed to 316 square feet. Dillon: That's it. McDonald: Kurt. Papke: No questions. McDonald: Debbie. Larson: I was just wondering if the city has talked to the homeowner about possibly using different materials. Auseth: We have not. We've only been working with the landscape architect. Larson: Okay. Auseth: But there again we don't give credit at this time for other materials as far as hardscape. Larson: No, no. I mean if they were to do something that was permeable. Auseth: Right, we don't give credit for permeable. Larson: Explain credit. Auseth: If somebody does a permeable paver, giving them a percentage of their overall square footage. They wouldn't get a 100% credit for 100 square foot surface. You'd give 25% credit. Larson: Okay. So 25% is something. That's a fourth. Auseth: Right, but at this time it's also the exception hasn't been determined by council. Larson: So say they did 3 different porches and they got 25% credit on each one of those, if they used a different material, it might offset, what are we 4%? Auseth: Right, but council hasn't determined a percentage at this point. Larson: I see, okay. McDonald: 25% and that's it. Larson: Okay. 31 u_>�, ,. a Planning Commission Meet• - September 4, 2007 • Papke: Has the driveway already been poured? Is the driveway in place? Because, the reason I ask is, in this particular case, unlike the previous case, the driveway looks to be 3 car wide all the way to the streets so if the driveway hadn't been poured yet, they would have the option of maybe saving a little bit by pulling in the driveway. Auseth: Correct, and I'm not positive if it has or has not. McDonald: Really I've asked all my questions and said all my comments so I have no more for you, thank you. You want to come back up and address this again? We're really a friendly bunch. Tim Johnson: Alright. The driveway is in as the plan. The front walkway, the current development walkway well call it is in but does not look like the current plan. That, in speaking with my client, obviously we're trying to be, you know this is something that we're hoping, we're leaning for but after following the previous presentation, we're trying to be hopeful here. We've already got, any time you do a wall over 4 feet, particularly after ... so phase 1 we're looking to really do is put the wall in to level off the back yard so you've got more green space, like we did at the other property. Put the staircase in. The patio, the fire pit patio is not going to happen so we're taking. Excuse me? Larson: Is there a fire pit? Tim Johnson: The fire pit's right here. Larson: Okay, we don't have one on ours. Tim Johnson: The fire pit is, well 242 square feet so we're willing to take that out of the picture. The walkway, the front walkway, we're going to keep the current development walkway. The driveway's in place. The deck plan that you see here are outlined in this area right here. And then this area right here is a proposed screen porch that they are looking to add in this space here. In my conversations with Angie, we were looking to start the retaining wall, the deck construction, the screened porch construction and we would still stay under compliance under the 25% just so we could you know kind of begin some construction here so my clients that moved from California can maybe get a yard sooner than later. After last week the wall .... I understand the building department. The deck cannot pass through. They cannot supply the deck permit because we were instructed last week of the other code that assumed 100 square foot patio had to be assumed for any door that wasn't connecting to any walkway, which if I'm correct puts us 20 square feet over the 25%. Auseth: Right, and that's for the screen porch, not the deck. Tim Johnson: Correct. There's the decking here, I'm learning from the previous project, we are going to use a different decking system. That was communicated and instructed immediately to anyone that we're going to be working with the client, that the decking would have spaces between the deck so they weren't permeable. Just another way of us trying to do it right and finding out where we were on the previous job but our goal is to do the wall of the deck, the 32 Planning Commission Me*g - September 4, 2007 • screen porch and we'd love to be able to do the back patio that's on this drawing here. There's a permeable concern given the pavers underneath the screen porch if the screen porch was ever being considered a permeable structure. It would just be the square footage under the deck and then the deck, or excuse me, the patio from the steps back to the lower patio door. So Angie correct me if I'm wrong, the only area that we would be requesting is the patio application on this lower area. That is above the 25% mark. Other than the extra 20 square feet that the city has to enforce, assuming that there's a patio installed of 100 square feet, which again we just found that out last week. Angie explained that, because there's no patio in place so I had to make that assumption and add that 100 square feet toward what we're representing. McDonald: So is this changing from what we have from city staff which says your proposed square footage was at 29.8 and you're now talking about scaling a lot of this back. Tim Johnson: Well we're trying to be realistic here with what we have in front of us. My client's very eager to get some green space in this year and ... now that we have easy access of equipment and we're trying to be sensible you know from the city wants so that we can begin some type of construction. The wall and the decking could begin any time. Other than that extra 20 square feet that we're over. The wall has nothing to do with that. It's just the screen porch. McDonald: Okay. City, or staff. At that point are we over the 25% of what he's talking about? Is that within what you would be allowed to do or are we still looking at a variance situation? Auseth: If the patio door is not underneath the 3 season screened in porch, then we have to assume the 100 square foot unless they propose something else. If it's underneath the screened porch, we don't double count. McDonald: Okay, so at that point is he under the 25% with what he's now saying he wants to do? Auseth: 26.8. McDonald: 1.8 percent. Tim Johnson: For my reference so you just want to say what the, where you came up with that just so we're all on the same page. Auseth: Sure. I added the house, garage, driveway, front porch. Oh, I didn't add in the front sidewalk. Tim Johnson: What did you have for that front sidewalk again? Auseth: 120. Tim Johnson: Yep. 33 Planning Commission Meeting - September 4, 2007 • Auseth: I added the retaining walls. The screen porch, the patio. Retaining walls and then the steps. McDonald: Okay, and that puts them over by 1.8% then? Auseth: That's 27.4 including that front sidewalk. McDonald: Okay. Any suggestions for, I really, I'm not sure it's worth everybody's effort to go through here and argue through this without going back to staff. There's got to be a way to take care of this 2.4% and not be asking for a variance because I'm not going to vote for a variance, and I think there's a majority here, I'm speaking out of tum but we don't want to set a precedence in this neighborhood. There's too many houses and there's too much trouble here. Tim Johnson: For the material considerations as far as you know, yeah the retaining wall basically you know the water, obviously the top boulder, it hits the top boulder. I've got you know a drainage system behind that. I mean we're considering 216 square feet of boulder retaining wall. McDonald: Well again that's a discussion you need to have with staff and if they agree with all that. Tim Johnson: That's you know, and we're using all mulch materials here. We're not going to put rock and poly down. Some cities require rock and poly to be impervious. McDonald: Okay, well let me ask you this. Are you willing to withdraw this? Go back to city staff and get it to 25%. Work on the other issues because I know you want to do all of this other stuff at this point too but at least you'd be able to move forward on this project if you could get it down to 25% and then we don't need to look at doing a variance. Tim Johnson: Well I believe we'd be willing to, we would like to just do the wall, the deck and screened porch. We're 20 square feet over, correct? Papke: Mr. Chair, I don't think we can modify what we're voting for on the fly here. McDonald: Well I'm not trying. I'm just trying to get them to withdraw it and then there's nothing for us to vote on. Papke: I agree. McDonald: Yeah, but that's what I'm asking is if we're that close to 25% and you're object is you want to get started on something, what are you willing to give to stay at the 25%? The other issues need to be worked out as you already heard and then at that point you would have to either reapply for a variance based upon what staff tells us, or maybe they come up with some way that you know you make it through this. But at this point if the object on your side is to get to work, then you need to stay at 25%. We don't need to vote on anything and as long as staff agrees that you're within the limits, then there shouldn't be a problem. Am I correct? 34 Planning Commission Mag - September 4, 2007 • Auseth: Correct. McDonald: I mean there's got to be some give and take here. 2.4% is not that much. Tim Johnson: Well I guess we, I mean we could sit here and say I gave this up. I mean I'm not going to get in that game. McDonald: Well I'm not asking you to. Tim Johnson: I don't think you want that either so. McDonald: I guess in fairness then fine, we'll go ahead and we'll vote on this. Tim Johnson: I guess one of the considerations that we would request so that we could at least begin with the lengthy part of this project is build the retaining walls and steps and the deck and the upper porch because of the assumptions you know, I had a conversation with Angie and she said as long as we're under 25%, and then we find out last week that we could begin the deck and the porch and the retaining wall until this meeting, but then we couldn't get the permit now which was something that was just thrown in front of us that we had to assume that there had to be 100 square foot patio as soon as the packet came out. You know for 20 square feet. We're talking about 20 square feet and we're trying to work with the city and I'm trying to you know do my job, that's keep my clients happy and try to do our due diligence to keep this going so, because every day that that sits out there, the concern of there's no erosion control. Concern of water running off there. I mean it's everybody's concern. McDonald: Well I agree with you and that's why I'm offering you is an opportunity to start work. Otherwise this gets voted down. Potential's there. Now you're waiting to go up to City Council. You've got to go through a process there. You're going to be you know a couple weeks trying to make the argument there. Nothing's going to happen. If you're willing to stay within the 25% and give, as far as what city engineering says, you've got enough here you can start work. The rest of these issues are bigger than this anyway. You're going to need to work with staff on that. Keefe: Well you know it's only 20 feet. I mean put a foot off the porch... Is it 20 square feet or is it, what is it? Undestad: It's just in the portion that they want to start now. Keefe: That's what I'm saying. If they just came for a variance for 20 feet, right? Undestad: 4 point, almost 5%. Keefe: I thought he said, I thought what he was saying you're 20 feet over the 25%. 35 P Planning Commission Mee• - September 4, 2007 is Tim Johnson: When you count in our wall, our deck, or excuse me, doesn't include here. But our screen porch, we're under the 25%. But because we have to make that assumption of the 100 square feet of a patio, that is. We wouldn't install anyways because our goal with the client is to come up with a patio application that's installed here so we wouldn't start that construction until we would get something in place with either the engineering department, or were able to get something in front of City Council or you to have a drainage system that would be accommodating to everybody's concerns and questions here. So we're not going to put a 100 square foot patio in because it's not, 100 square feet does nobody any good. Larson: Where is this supposedly assumed that it would be? Tim Johnson: It's supposed to be off the back patio door. Larson: And it's obviously not there so why is it an issue? It's out of the plan... Tim Johnson: We have to allow for it because the door is not adjoining to any walkway, but there is you know, there's no reason for us to develop something like that. McDonald: Okay, then in that case what it sounds like everybody's hands are tied and we will have to take this application as it is and we'll take it from there and then you would be able to go back to city staff and work out whatever you can but at this point the magic number is 25%. Undestad: I still have a question for you. Did you design this plan? Tim Johnson: Yeah. Undestad: But not the other one? Tim Johnson: I redesigned. It actually had a lot more hard cover. Undestad: When you submit these, when you picked your boulder wall guys, did they submit their plans for just a picture of that boulder wall on there? Or when your client chooses a deck contractor that you recommend. Tim Johnson: We're doing everything but the actual deck and screened porch construction. It's all in-house. Undestad: So when you submit your plans or whatever portion of these projects you're doing, . you're submitting this entire plan? Tim Johnson: Correct. Undestad: Unlike the last project, your decking contractor just submitted his picture of his deck he was putting onto that. Tim Johnson: Correct. 36 Planning Commission Meag - September 4, 2007 • McDonald: Anyone else have any questions then? Tim Johnson: You know we tried to design, we designed it once to be you know in compliance with the 25% until last week on the assumption of the 100 square feet which put us over so. Keefe: Would you consider tabling it and coming back in 2 weeks or whatever to revisit it? Undestad: Or working it out. Keefe: Yeah, working it out. Tim Johnson: Well I guess on both applications, I mean help me out with this. McDonald: Well on the first one you've got a bigger problem. On this one you're closer to the 25% and if you're saying you want to start work, I think there's enough compromise here, you can start work. If we vote this down, then what you're faced with is again going through the appeal process. No work will start until this works through the City Council and at that point again they're very sensitive to the 25% right now also and they're very sensitive to the flooding in this area. I don't think you have a very good chance of getting this through. Then where are you at? I mean you're 4 or 5 weeks out. I'm offering you a chance to compromise the 25%. You can start some work. You can continue to lobby because you're got 40 something lots in this area. They all have the same problem. This has got to be solved. It's solved by people such as you coming forward and presenting the city with new information and asking that ordinances be changed. Undestad: Can I ask one thing of Angie? If they table it tonight and meet with you guys, try to work it out but say in a couple days it doesn't look like it's going to happen, can he get back on here in 2 weeks so it's like a 2 week delay for the entire process or how does that work? If we table it would he come right back. Generous: Wed table it to the next meeting to review it and come back with any updates. Tim Johnson: Could we begin the, obviously the deck has nothing to do with this. Could we begin the deck construction and not construct the screened porch maybe at this time so at least the decking can begin and the whole structure... McDonald: That's a discussion you can have with them and that's what I'm saying is that if you're willing to table this, go talk to them. You get within the 25%, if they say that's okay, then this is done. This project is done. It doesn't have to come back here unless you want to add all the rest of this. And in the meantime as you saw the first project, you've got some issues as far as these offsets. You need to spend some time talking to city staff and city engineering and making them aware of what's going on and getting some information up to City Council and see about getting these ordinances changed. We can't help you there. We go by what's written on the ordinance. We make recommendations and we've made this before that, yeah there probably needs to be some offset but you know how do we go about that? 37 ;�S Planning Commission Meeting - September 4, 2007 • Tim Johnson: To save everybody time, if I came with for instance a Westwood plan... McDonald: You can talk to city staff. It's not going to do any good to come here. Keefe: ... but we'll table it so you don't have to go through a whole ... be a lot faster for you. McDonald: Yeah, and at least on this one what you're trying to do is start something for your clients, I think you can do it. Keefe: And if you still need a variance, it will be back on in a couple of weeks... McDonald: My suggestion would be you don't want a variance. Tim Johnson: I already know that much. Keefe: Does that take a motion? McDonald: I don't think it takes a motion to table. I think, it does take a motion to table? Okay. Well at this point we're. Okay, if we table it, is there a need for a public hearing? Generous: You would just open the public hearing. McDonald: They would open it up if he brings it back. Keefe: Motion to table. Larson: Second. Keefe moved, Larson seconded that the Planning Commission table Variance #07-20 for a 4.8% hard surface coverage variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage in Pinehurst 2nd Addition. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of6to0. PUBLIC HEARING: Generous: Very briefly. There's 5 amendments being proposed. The first two deal with the subdivision ordinance. There are 3 trees that the city wants to restrict the use of. While we don't want to prohibit it outright, we would like to put a note that if you're going to use these trees, they have to get specific approval. They're ash, Amur maple and the Colorado spruce, and so we're proposing a change to Section 18-61, subsection (a)(1) to incorporate those changes. The second one is in the calculation of tree coverage and that on a lot or a property as part of the subdivision process. We also, while we currently exclude wetlands from trees, from the area that they calculate the tree total with, they also want to add the bluff area which are also areas that are m STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for a 4.8% variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage for the addition of patios and hardscape. LOCATION: 2081 Pinehurst Drive Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2" d Addition APPLICANT: Southview Design OWNER: Scott & Sonya Schroeder Tim Johnson 2081 Pinehurst Drive 1875 East 50th St. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 PRESENT ZONING: Residential Single Family (RSF) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density ACREAGE: 0.47 acres DENSITY: NA SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a 4.8% impervious surface variance for the addition of patios and hardscape. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi judicial decision. SCANNED 2081 Pinehurst Drive Variance Request • Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 2 of 7 PROPOSAL SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 29.8% hard surface coverage. The Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum of 25% hard surface coverage. The property is zoned Residential Single Family (RSF). It is located on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2nd Addition. Access to the site is gained off of Pinehurst Drive. The City received a building permit for the subject site that reflected a 22.1% hard surface coverage. The plans had adequate area to accommodate a future patio. The landscape contractor for this property is the same as the property located at 2101 Pinehurst Drive. The contractor received notice that the Zoning Ordinance permits a maximum hard surface coverage of 25%. The contractor was aware that this site will face the same hard surface issues as the 2101 Pinehurst site and as such, submitted a variance request for the subject site. Staff is recommending denial of the applicant's request based on the fact that the applicant has reasonable use of the property with adequate outdoor expansion area and approval of this application will could a precedent. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Vari• Request • Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 3 of 7 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20 Division 3. Variances Section 20-615 (4) RSF District Requirements; Hard Surface Coverage Sec 20-905 (6) Single-family dwellings. BACKGROUND The property is located on Lot 25, Block 1, Pinehurst 2°d Addition, which is zoned Residential Single Family (RSF). The subject property has an area of 20,507 square feet. It has a lot frontage of 107 feet and an average depth of 238.5 feet. Minimum lot dimensions required by ordinance are 15,000 square feet lot, 90 -foot lot frontage and 125 -foot lot depth. This lot exceeds the minimum requirements for the RSF zoning district. The building permit for the subject site was issued on February 1, 2007. It reflected a hard surface coverage of 22.1 %. This included the proposed home, driveway, and front sidewalk. The maximum impervious surface in the RSF district is 25%. The proposed 22.1 % coverage allowed for future improvements, such as a patio. Based on the building permit application, the homeowner would have had an additional 604 square feet of hard surface for future expansion. I 1' I � P. ii v � • I' Ir i i I I . -I � a , N .�- it `� \ ♦ b l: !.. j I i A i Y - i \ XYeY lsauwm opy w _ 'fopwwI FCFNn -1 �ttrmu T ao m=om o% mma m Xwa L • ne a Ifll[1Yitl YNWX OX 1NfXM `ri iINQM®FlA'ud YUPSO amt .� 5m' J.n C! N�YfY MIS Y FIelY3 aSI LG eht01 Y+ - 1i AmJ:Ji9:'YX.U+wn� W.Y lG 6 �� �RrM i 4i4 NN4 FWY YNIAiRLr Yw BMAY pX1. N.1. tY I , COXSIaVCMN LFII MIaA :'u.0�- .�. SW9 ML•N Cf IB1dM LYOIMI4Ni Ip_y_C—M1 W�IMLMMNI. Ye v4K T iA`i:.t.. SA,.QH.atut NYa.sr "� xrocmn'� G- - r� vix`.��v.`•nnw � • mai« d"+.I.� v.�.M �.smnMYw.�r rpm v r�:nww VfLXYSne.vrY.meaaeavyrttad4 _ MnMXaMNAMY . ABX. w imeo+n%. 11[.I ,�.y,t - W8, fumpnt.unwu m�mt~...,. •64.�am�.d�+M.W nXYM6.M�.n'e e'�v.s�eor+ q.anuNtix�im:. i��w u�ivldbfhnm.wvvYwrY.v.uV�YaYM.Ye� M�s�t u.a..av uf�sY.an.u.NY.r 1DiM RVP {T!V F. '+OVmnsnrM ♦aXYY(eX�v, m. MA�6XA0 pl1g a rv.isCYAy. fYb.. n.ip.mnn.r:.,w�..aLY�a k. :.:. Peeaemo y'�y�•M1YA W.L .ssi u.W.a.X.w.u.0 v* -l. ww. w..i y. any IYD. ISS S'� I �` I Mew= wml error. I'�' 2081 Pinehurst Drive Varia• Request • Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 4 of 7 In 2006, during the Public Hearing process for the Pinehurst Development, staff expressed concern with the potential hard surface coverage on some of the proposed lots. The developer submitted a sample of potential homes for the overall subdivision. Some of these homes were too large. As a result, staff recommended the applicant reduce the number of lots within the subdivision. In 2006, the applicant replatted the site from 43 lots to 41 lots to increase the lot size. Due to the size of the proposed homes on the lots, the developer was aware of the limited availability of additional square footage for any further improvements or additions on these parcels. In an attempt to avoid future hard cover issues due to the increased size of homes on lots, on July 6, 2006, the City amended Sec. 20-905: Single-family dwellings (6) "Where access doors are proposed from a dwelling to the outdoors, which does not connect directly to a sidewalk or stoop, a minimum ten feet by ten feet hard surface area shall be assumed. Such surface area must be shown to comply with property line, lake and wetland setbacks; may not encroach into conservation or drainage and utility easements; and shall not bring the site's hard surface coverage above that permitted by ordinance." ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a 4.8% hard surface coverage variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage. The lot area is 20,507 square feet. Based on the 25% maximum coverage allowed, the home, driveway, walkway, etc. may occupy 5126.75 square feet. The remaining impervious surface allowed was 604.75 square feet. The proposed hard cover additions occupy 1,378 square feet, which is 773 square feet over what is allowed by ordinance for this parcel. 2081 Pinehurst Drive VarianceRequest • Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 5 of 7 Surface Staff Building Permit Square Feet Proposed Square Feet House/Garage 3,088 3,088 Driveway 1,097 1,058 Front Porch 217 217 Front Sidewalk 120 316 Screen Porch 255 Patio 611 Retaining Wall 216 Steps 54 Fire it/Patio 242 Total 4,522 or 22.1% 6,103 or 29.81/—o- 9.81/ Staff informed the developer of the hard cover issues during the subdivision process. Lennar Homes replatted Pinehurst god Addition to eliminate two lots. It is the developer and real estate agent's duty to inform the prospective homeowner of any and all limitations on the site. Since Lennar Homes is also the builder, they were aware of the constraints on the property. Due to the nature of the homes in this development, the expectation is to improve the exterior of the property with landscaping and hardscaping. Prospective homeowners should have been made aware of the impervious restrictions prior to building on these lots. In addition, all hardscape improvements require approval of a Residential Zoning Permit obtained by the homeowner or contractor. A residential zoning permit acts as a safety net to identify any potential code violations, such as setback encroachments and hard cover requirements, prior to construction. This permit is at no cost to the homeowner and allows the City and the homeowner an opportunity to correct any encroachments or violation before installation begins. It is the contractor/homeowner's responsibility to contact the City prior to construction and obtain a Residential Zoning Permit to ensure compliance with city code. If a variance is granted from the 25% hard surface maximum, it may set a precedent in this neighborhood, as well as other neighborhoods, to apply for variances for hardscape improvements beyond the restrictions set forth in the City Code. Site Characteristics The topography of the site slopes significantly in the rear yard from a high of elevation of 1052.6 to 1040. 1, which constitutes a 12.5 -foot drop in a matter of 35 feet. A storm water pond is located outside of the property lines, just to the west of the rear yard of the property. The runoff from these lots will run directly into the storm water pond. While increasing the hard surface coverage for one lot may not impact the storm water pond significantly; increasing the hard surface coverage for a number of lots in this development will significantly impact the storm water system. The water from this pond eventually runs into the Minnesota River. 2081 Pinehurst Drive Vari• Request Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 6 of 7 According to the Hydrology Guide for Minnesota by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, the recommended hard surface coverage for a on -half acre (approximately 21,000 square foot) lot is 25%. This information is based on the Hydrologic Curve which translates to the amount of runoff produced from a particular surface. The Hydrologic Curve for the Pinehurst Subdivision is 72. This is consistent with the U.S.D.A Soil Conservation Service for soil types B and C, soils containing non -permeable material, such as clay. Permitted Use The site is zoned RSF, Residential Single Family. Reasonable use of a property within the RSF district is a single-family home with a two -car garage. A single-family home with a three -car garage is currently constructed on the property. Even after the initial construction of the home, there was over 600 square feet of additional hard cover allowed on the property. I�II.It7t�t�9 The Planning Commission 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 this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet these criteria. Finding. The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, a two -car garage, and the addition of a ten -foot by ten -foot patio could be constructed without a variance. 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 conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the RSF zoning district. These conditions were discussed at length during the Planning Commission and City Council meetings when the development came in for preliminary and final plat approval. The development was replatted in 2006 and two lots were eliminated to increase the size of the lots. The lots are well over the minimum lot area requirement and have sufficient space to construct the desired home as well as other improvements to the property. C. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. 2081 Pinehurst Drive VarianceRequest • Planning Case 07-20 September 4, 2007 Page 7 of 7 Finding. The purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. However, the income potential may be increased as an indirect result. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding. The alleged hardship of exceeding the maximum hard surface coverage is a self- created hardship. The homes on the lots are very large. However, there was an additional 600 square feet of allowable expansion possible after the initial approval of the building permit. C. 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 may be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located, in that additional storm water runoff is generated from the hard surface on the property. 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. Finding: 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. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission denies Variance 07-20 for a 4.8% hard surface coverage variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage in Pinehurst 2nd Addition. 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced copy of lot survey. 4. Reduced copy of hardscape design. 5. Pinehurst Hydrograph Report—Drainage Area 10. 6. Drainage Map for Pinehurst 2nd Addition. 7. Hydrology Guide for Minnesota, figure 3-2. 8. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. gAplan\2007 planning casesl07-20 2081 pinehmst hsc vanance\2081 pinehmt vu report.doc D +�+ 0 .r,.w a....r •�rwr. _ _ o WIYW -+ s' I r �. .... I I I I I I .....�.,... ice' _ I 1 1 W 1 -------'ate•'—__----- --- �4 EMANU I_ _ W ----- __________ I � 1 �r.p rrr+tr.r�ir�w. I 1 I CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED I II i i AUG 2 3 2007 I I I 1 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT 1 1 i I � I LANDSCAPE DESIGN FOR .,� DESIGN INFORMATION SCALE SCHROEDER RESIDENCE ;�,.�.,`" -- DESIGWSALES REP:TM JoIr m REVISIONS N.T.5 DESIGWSALES ASST:Ifa<Klve 2081 PINEHURST DRIVE QIlM1JI �� .nab 0 — CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -"�- -r��— DATE:PIAU01 01/blfl OMiNI CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO. 07-20 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commissionwillholda publichearing on Tuesday. September 4, 2007, at 7:00 p -m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Han, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request fora hard surface coverage varianceon propertylocated at 2081 Pinehurst Drive. Applicant: Southview Design. Aplan showingthelocationofthe proposal is available for public review on the. C2ln'ty' web site a cow .eLc)'i�lassen.nM.uS/ sery p oratcity Hall during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attendthispublichearingandeapress their opinions with respect to this proposal. Angie Auseth, Planner I Email: Phone: 952-227- 1132 (?ublishedintheChanhassen Villager on Thursday, August 23, 2007; No. 4939) 9 0 Affidavit of Publication Southwest Newspapers State of Minnesota) )SS. County of Carver ) Laurie A. Hartmann, being duly sworn, on oath says that she is the publisher or the authorized agent of the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Vil- lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: (A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 33IA.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. (B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No.3.j % was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition and publication of the Notice: abedefghijklmnopgrstuvwxyz Subscribed and swom before me on this 21:�day Of 2007 Notary Public v Laurie A. Hartmann =M�W-Alpy A010 RATE INFORMATION Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space.... $40.00 per column inch Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ................................ S40.00 per column inch Rate actually charged for the above matter ............................................... $11.89 per column inch SCANNED 0 0 C-1,2-0 -1-2-0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO. 07-20 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, September 4, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for a hard surface coverage variance on property located at 2081 Pinehurst Drive. Applicant: Southview Design. A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review on the City's web site at www.ci.charthassen.mn.us/sere/plan/07-20.html or at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. Angie Auseth, Planner I Email: aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Phone: 952-227-1132 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on August 23, 2007) SCANNED 0 0 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 CffOF (952) 227-1100 CHMSEB To: Mr. Tim Johnson Southview Design 1875 East 50" Street Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 Invoice SALESPERSON DATE TERMS KTM 8/23/07 upon receipt QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 29 Property Owners List within 500' of 2081 Pinehurst Drive (29 labels) $3.00 $87.00 TOTAL DUE $87.00 NOTE: This invoice is in accordance with the Development Review Application submitted to the City by the Addressee shown above (copy attached) and must be paid prior to the public hearing scheduled for 9/4107. Make all checks payable to: City of Chanhassen Please write the following code on your check: Planning Case #07-20. If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! CITY OF CHANHASSEN P O BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 08/28/2007 2:53 PM Receipt No. 0050512 CLERK: katie PAYEE: SOUTHVIEW DESIGN ------------------------------------------------------- GIS List 87.00 Total 87.00 Cash Credit Cd Change SCANNED CITY OF CHANAA3SEN 7700 Market Boulevard PC Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 0 August 7, 2007 Southview Design Attn: Tim Johnson 1875 E 5& St Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 0 Re: Variance Application 2081 Pinehurst Drive —Planning Case 07-20 Dear Tim: This letter is to inform you that we are in receipt of your variance application for property 2081 Pinehurst Drive, located in Pinehurst 2nd Addition. Engineering Currently, the architectural drawings and the survey are inconsistent. These two Phone: %M7.1160 drawings must reflect the same data/calculations. Therefore, the application is Fax 952.227.1170 incomplete and the following information is missing: Finance submittal date is August 31, 2007 for the Planning Commission meeting on Phone: 952227.1140 1. An Asbuilt Survey showing all improvements on the parcel including the area Fax 952.227.1110 of the following: lot, home, stoop, front walk, and driveway. Park & Recreation 2. Proposed plans showing impervious calculations. (If the decking is composed Phone: 952227.1120 of anything other than slatted boards, then it should be included as hard cover. Fax: 952.227.1110 However, any hardcover that is directly beneath the deck may be omitted from Recreation Center the calculations.) 2310 Coulter Boulevard - Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax 952.227.1404 If all the missing data is submitted by Friday, August 10, 2007, we will be able to process the application as scheduled. However, if you are unable to meet the Planning & Natural Resources Friday, August 10, 2007 deadline, your item will be removed from the agenda and Phone: 952.227.1130 your application will be deemed incomplete. Fax: 952.227.1110 Public works We will not be able to review it until these items have been submitted. This also 1591 Park Road means that the 60 -day deadline to process an application will not begin until we Phone: 952227.1300 have received all the necessary information to review the. application. Our next Fax: 952.227.1310 submittal date is August 31, 2007 for the Planning Commission meeting on Senior Center October 2, 2007. Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (952) 227-1132. Web She www.ci.aenhassen.mn.us Sincerely, Angie Auseth Planner aannvos g:xplan\2007 planning cases\07-20 2081 pinehurst hsc variancerincomplete application.doc The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. CITY OF CHANHASSEN • • P O BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 08/06/2007 3:06 PM Receipt No. 0048978 CLERK: katie PAYEE: Southview Design & Construct Planning Case 07-20 ------------------------------------------------------- Use & Variance 200.00 Recording Fees 50.00 Total Cash Check 33177 Change 250.00 0.00 250.00 0.00 SCANNED SOUTHVIEW DESIGN 8 CONSTRUCTION, INC.I I City of Chanhassen 8-03-07 8.3.07 Permit 8-03-07 33177 j 250.00 250.00 SCP�NE0 33177 250.00 250.00 m p $mSi g X 1062 I V lu �r0 r- Ial I _ @$^ rel i 3 Imo, LT :x MYVEWAY 7 IaDX GRADE f is ' L ,* K n� t s, I� i 4kL{ Ace,", HARD COVER CALCULATIONS HOUSE = 3,088 S.F. BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY = 1,097 S.F. PORCH = 217 S.F. SIDEWALK = 120 S.F. TOTAL COVER = 4,522 S.F. TOTAL LOT S.F. PERCENT OF HARD COVER JW saw 'EA 11EE �i g \ 10}A _ x lu �r0 r- Ial I _ @$^ rel i 3 Imo, LT :x MYVEWAY 7 IaDX GRADE f is ' L ,* K n� t s, I� i 4kL{ Ace,", HARD COVER CALCULATIONS HOUSE = 3,088 S.F. BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY = 1,097 S.F. PORCH = 217 S.F. SIDEWALK = 120 S.F. TOTAL COVER = 4,522 S.F. TOTAL LOT S.F. PERCENT OF HARD COVER JW saw NOTES: 1. Benchmarks: (1) TNH @ Lots 3 & 4, Block 3: ELEV. = 1037.42 (2) TNH lying west of Manchester Drive at Outlots A and B: ELEV. = 1028.88 (3) TIP on the easterly lot line from the northeast extension ine of the proposed house. TIP is lying PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 33.38 feet southerly along east lot line. ELEV. = 1060.5 z Address: 2081 Pinehurst Avenue Lot 25, Block 1, PINEHURST 2H0 ADDITION, Carver County, Minnesota. 3. No elevations, either found in the field or on this certificate, should be used for construction without being SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION checked against the benchmarks shown on this survey. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a a. No building information provided by this survey should be used withrxit being checked against architectural duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the state of Minnesota. plans. Use architectural plans for building construction purposes. Dated this 3rd day of January 2007. a There is a brick ledge on the front of this house. It is not shown on itis survey but is accounted for and is Mc ombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. within the setback requirements. PROPOSED ELEVATION c PER FO LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION = 1054.6 Co"TACT DEVELO D. fdon, PLS TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION = 1064.3 SANITARY 5E',NER APdD WAT MinnVdneso ecense No. 17255 GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION °� = 1064.0 SERVICE LOCATION - OVERHEAD DOOR This certification is not valid unless wet signed in blue ink omwd Englneming • Plm,ning • Sa—*g Client Pmt m[051 1v1[,.ikuf6} SeeetTitle sbw Rez D. +m re» a 1a Lot U TBlock 1 Date ,A„� VP!FRA MM � •. AV Pub Homes PINEHURST 2ND ADDITIONCortficate of Surwly1 A°,add ,dr Cl�re�em Pmm X416-1010 •lm'N.<A-M1SII Ewell,NN l°oiie° —�)- A01ift 11L tAluihaecen, NN��— SCANNEO IIIr1M r,a IN•[ 10[6C g \ 10}A _ x Edi 211.3 A F Y \ V ^ X x VL7y 0 30 0 30 ^ ^ x 1 �! �V x \ " o 200 0.00^ SCALE IN FEET APPR ED ^ X5.35 SO $ \ \ �■ ■ — tw BY: DEPT: J1 8 REQUIRE NOTES: 1. Benchmarks: (1) TNH @ Lots 3 & 4, Block 3: ELEV. = 1037.42 (2) TNH lying west of Manchester Drive at Outlots A and B: ELEV. = 1028.88 (3) TIP on the easterly lot line from the northeast extension ine of the proposed house. TIP is lying PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 33.38 feet southerly along east lot line. ELEV. = 1060.5 z Address: 2081 Pinehurst Avenue Lot 25, Block 1, PINEHURST 2H0 ADDITION, Carver County, Minnesota. 3. No elevations, either found in the field or on this certificate, should be used for construction without being SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION checked against the benchmarks shown on this survey. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a a. No building information provided by this survey should be used withrxit being checked against architectural duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the state of Minnesota. plans. Use architectural plans for building construction purposes. Dated this 3rd day of January 2007. a There is a brick ledge on the front of this house. It is not shown on itis survey but is accounted for and is Mc ombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. within the setback requirements. PROPOSED ELEVATION c PER FO LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION = 1054.6 Co"TACT DEVELO D. fdon, PLS TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION = 1064.3 SANITARY 5E',NER APdD WAT MinnVdneso ecense No. 17255 GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION °� = 1064.0 SERVICE LOCATION - OVERHEAD DOOR This certification is not valid unless wet signed in blue ink omwd Englneming • Plm,ning • Sa—*g Client Pmt m[051 1v1[,.ikuf6} SeeetTitle sbw Rez D. +m re» a 1a Lot U TBlock 1 Date ,A„� VP!FRA MM � •. AV Pub Homes PINEHURST 2ND ADDITIONCortficate of Surwly1 A°,add ,dr Cl�re�em Pmm X416-1010 •lm'N.<A-M1SII Ewell,NN l°oiie° —�)- A01ift 11L tAluihaecen, NN��— SCANNEO IIIr1M r,a IN•[ 10[6C A VL7y �! �V APPR ED ^ X5.35 SO $ \ \ �■ ■ — tw BY: DEPT: J1 8 REQUIRE DATE _. _C X AS BUILT SURVEY BE uED 6Y � BEFORE C/o VVILL DEPT: LEGEND DATE: INSTALL TYPE _ EROSION CONT OL THE PLA4 AND'CR DENOTES IRON MONUMENT 6Y. DE T. AS SHOWN ON DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION X(123.4) DATE: Z FENCING CEITIFiCATE OF SURVEY PRIOR TO UN -11. LOT IS DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION DENOTES X 123,4 g r1 p', T10N AND Iv1AINTAIN DURING WINTER DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE r FJLLY VEGETATED; BALES MAY. DENOTES TOP IRON PIPE T,LP CONSTRUCTION STAKED HAY. LIEU OF FENCING STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER s- lF J BE USED IN S WATERMAIN, HYDRANT, AND VALVE NOTES: 1. Benchmarks: (1) TNH @ Lots 3 & 4, Block 3: ELEV. = 1037.42 (2) TNH lying west of Manchester Drive at Outlots A and B: ELEV. = 1028.88 (3) TIP on the easterly lot line from the northeast extension ine of the proposed house. TIP is lying PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 33.38 feet southerly along east lot line. ELEV. = 1060.5 z Address: 2081 Pinehurst Avenue Lot 25, Block 1, PINEHURST 2H0 ADDITION, Carver County, Minnesota. 3. No elevations, either found in the field or on this certificate, should be used for construction without being SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION checked against the benchmarks shown on this survey. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a a. No building information provided by this survey should be used withrxit being checked against architectural duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the state of Minnesota. plans. Use architectural plans for building construction purposes. Dated this 3rd day of January 2007. a There is a brick ledge on the front of this house. It is not shown on itis survey but is accounted for and is Mc ombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. within the setback requirements. PROPOSED ELEVATION c PER FO LOWEST FLOOR ELEVATION = 1054.6 Co"TACT DEVELO D. fdon, PLS TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION = 1064.3 SANITARY 5E',NER APdD WAT MinnVdneso ecense No. 17255 GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION °� = 1064.0 SERVICE LOCATION - OVERHEAD DOOR This certification is not valid unless wet signed in blue ink omwd Englneming • Plm,ning • Sa—*g Client Pmt m[051 1v1[,.ikuf6} SeeetTitle sbw Rez D. +m re» a 1a Lot U TBlock 1 Date ,A„� VP!FRA MM � •. AV Pub Homes PINEHURST 2ND ADDITIONCortficate of Surwly1 A°,add ,dr Cl�re�em Pmm X416-1010 •lm'N.<A-M1SII Ewell,NN l°oiie° —�)- A01ift 11L tAluihaecen, NN��— SCANNEO IIIr1M r,a IN•[ 10[6C o° g I I jl I jjj I I ,ate -I I me I I i � uau.m I mo _ I I I I Y=�4m• I I I I i i LANDSCAPE DESIGN FOR 5. y,�,� DESIGN INFORMATION SCALE SCHROEDER RESIDENCEDE I REVISIONS V, = B' FOIA7/0i 07/012081 PINEHURST DRIVE ■/�.CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DATE:07/DESIGN/SALES �ASST:Dm, 1161ve �\I°® �naN�,cn 0/01 QI/P5m OVN01 SCANNE':; SCANNED i r..w.....r •r�aww p •r.�r a.+r.a •rreww •..wrr �+.r I i w� � •wr+...w I I I I I I i ra.+.rr I I I i a.rw dw �i I tilt I I I I I I w r I I Ip YIr Yom. I �a "------ --F —------------------------- — --- w I � I CITU OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED I I AUG 2 3 2007 II I I I CHANHASSEN PLANNING I 1 I DEPT 1 I i I � I I � i LANDSCAPE DESIGN FOR.�".�4 DESIGN INFORMATION SCALE a.... DESIGWSALFSREP:TIrn J*iwi I REVISIONS IINf5 SCHROEDER RESIDENCE 2081 PINEHURST DRIVE .�,r�+,,,`++w•--� DESIGN/SALES ASST:tfic Mtg= CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 „ry .a �•...+.w DATE:OII0471 PI/6Nl �� SCANNED 3 Sec 3 Little F I Alleman's Con 6 Big Sky Sur 3 Autumn Brilliance (Single Ste 3 Rock Boulder Retaining Wall ' � 1 \ Stone Steps 3' I ` Boulder Outcropping l 1 \ l I � I � I .\ –-_.____ ___ /\ Landscape Lim -s I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ORI' OF CHANHASSEN I RECEIVED I AUG 2 3 2007 CNANHASSEN PLANNItyG MpT I Appx Locatioe Ol _. 4)GRADE Sod 1050.0 1048.0 -- --- -- -- -- -- -- –– e – – –— 10460 ` 1 l Rack and Poly Mdntsioice Strip l 1 - -- --- 1044.0 ------------------------------------- ---- / -_—___________ ____�.! �_ _��_______L=d _ Limits "�'' scope OW10YI�------ m — - - - 1 - - - — 1042.0 Wal 1010' 08/10/07 I -� -- -- ---1040.0 I SITE AREA CALCULATIONS I I Lot: 20,507 sf Driveway: 1,055 sf House: 3,0685f Front Porch 217 sf Front Walk: 316 sf (Does not include boulevard) Patio: 611 sf (Does not include area under screen porch) Upper Wall: 216 sf Steps: 54 sf Firepit: 242 sf Screen Porch 255 sf Total Hardcover G, 103 sf 29.8% Hardcover in Blaze Maple ashioned Bleeding Heart i Brilliance Serviceberry (Clump) a Regal H05ta � Returns Daylily 1875 EAST 50TH STREET INVER GROVE HEIGHTS MINNESOTA 55077 PHONE 651.455.8238 FAX 651.455,1734 Sst.�1979 SOUTHYIEW ,.DESIGN♦* landscape contractors 3 Sea Green Juniper 3 Little Princess Spirea I Alleman's Compact Dogwood 6 Big Sky Sunrise Echinacea 3 Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry (Single Stem) I Pyramidal Arborvitae 3 Alleman's Compact Dogwood - 3 Minuet Weigela 6 Purple Coneflower I Big Sky Sunrise Echinacea 1 Butterfly Flower Asclepias 5 Prairie Dropseed 3 Happy Returns Daylily 3 Quaking Aspen DRAIN TILE Sleeve 1 8 Baja Daylily 12 May Night Salvia 3 Kobold Original Liatris 8 Peach Blossom Astilbe 2 Annabelle Hydrangea 2 Pyramidal Arborvitae 4i I Sleeve �rw..... NOTE. YHkury 4 ro mluilafed P�' O •� hYt Y Porch (Scala on Plow- ad sides.) B Taunton Yew 3 Dwarf Winged Euonymue II Russian Sage Boulder Outcropping at Herm 07 Bottom of SkIrg 08/10/07 I 1 Stone Steppers bRY W Et1L I I Sod I Boulder Retaining Wall �3 Stone Steps 3' Boulder Outcropping I I Landscape Limits 09 Rock ad Poly Mointa a Strip Brick Paver Landing DRAIN BASIN Upper Deck Wag 1090' 08/10/07 Screen Porch IBI 1, A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 II 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 11 11— II _ I 1 11 I / I 1 1 1 II 1 1 ,1I i I / 1 II I 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 III I 2 Autumn Blaze Maple I2 Old -Fashioned Bleeding Heart I RAIN TILE I 4— Pillar J2'6"x2'6" 1052.0 1 I II --�--- 1050.0 1045.0 - - — 1046.0 1 Autumn Brilliance Serviceberry (Clump) 8 Krossa Regal Hosts 12 Happy Returns Daylily - - - - — 1044.G i I i y I _Landscape Limits 1042.0 I SITE AREA CALCULATIONS I TODAY Total Lot: 201507 sf I Driveway: 1,097 sf House: 310889f I Front Porch 217 sf Front Walk: 120 sf I Boulder Wall: 216 sf Steps: 54 sf Rear Brick Paver Landing: 60 sf I Back Porch: 255 sf Total Hardcover 5,107 sf I 24.9% Hardcover FUTURE I Firepit: 242 sf Front Walk: 305 sf (Does not include boulevard) I Paver Patio: 540 sf I ISOD I 4-6" TOPSOIL GRAVEL 12"— -- - - I4" DIA. DRAINTILE PERFORATED WITH SOCK LINER FRENCH DRAIN DETAIL N.T.5 6 I SOD I 4-6" TOPSOIL I OVERFLOW VALVE WASHED RIVER R K FABRIC LINER DRY WELL DET IL / N T.5 - - - - —1040.0 1875 EAST 50TH STREET INVER GROVE HEIGHTS MINNESOTA 55077 PHONE 651.456.8238 FAX 651,455,1734