Loading...
2 Variance 491 Trap Line LaneCITY OF BOA DATE: 6/17/97 CC DATE: CASE #: 97-5 Variance By: A1-Jaff/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: LC CATION: APPLICANT: A 45 Foot Setback Variance from a Natural Wetland to Construct a Deck 491 Trap Line Lane Roger and Gail Stech 491 Trap Line Lane Chanhassen, MN (612)470-4473 .J PPd~SENT ZONING: ACREAGE: PUD-R, Planned Unit Development Residential 1.48 acres hJ DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: WATER AND SEWER: PI-_-YSICAL CHARACTER.: 2000 LAND USE PLAN: N - Vacant residential - City of Shorewood S - PUD, single family E -'PUD, single family W - PUD, single family Available to the site. The site is adjacent to a Natural wetland. Low Density Residential Stech Variance June 17, 1997 Page 2 BACKGROUND On February 8, 1984, the City Council approved the final plat for Chestnut Ridge Phase II. Setbacks from the natural wetland appear to not have been taken into consideration when the depth of those lots were approved. The ordinance required a 75 foot setback from the edge of the natural wetland. In June, 1988, the City approved a building permit for a house for the subject residence to be built approximately 45 feet from the edge of the natural wetland. Again, we are uncertain as to why the variance situation was not caught during review of the building permit. On July 23, 1990, the owner of the property applied for a variance to construct a porch and a deck on the site. The same setback variance was also requested. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals approved the variance, subject to conditions. The decision was appealed to the City Council. The City Council approved the variance. Variances are valid for one year. If substantial work is not performed within one year, the variance will be rendered null and void. The applicant did not construct the deck and the variance expired. The home was sold to a new party (Mr. and Mrs. Stech). They wish to construct a deck only with an identical foot print to that which was approved on July 23, 1990. Since the variance has expired, the applicant must go through the process again, hence the variance application. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-406 (b) of the City Code states that all structures must maintain a 75 foot setback from a Natural wetland for lots of record created before December 14, 1992. ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to build a deck within 30 feet of a Natural wetland. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 75 foot setback. The rear elevation of the house shows 3 sliding doors that were put there for the purpose of constructing a future deck. Errors appear to have been made by the City that resulted in the creation of a lot that was difficult, if not impossible, to build upon without a variance. The error was compounded by approval of a building permit which resulted in the construction of a home without obtaining a variance. At the time these actions were taken, staff was working under enormous pressure being both shorthanded and faced with a large number of development proposals. Since that time a number of administrative changes have been undertaken to hopefully eliminate this problem and the City has since adopted methods to improve wetland identification. A variance may be granted by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals or City Council only if all of the following criteria are met: St~ch Variance Jul ~e 17, 1997 Page 3 a.f : That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause 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 and develop neighborhoods pre-existing standards exist. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. Staff conducted a survey within the 500 feet of the surrounding area and discovered that the 6 houses that abut the wetland, 3 have setbacks less than 75 feet, while the other 3 have either 75 feet or more. The 3 residences that are located within the 75 foot setback area were approved under the following conditions: Lot 2, Block 3 - Did not appear in front of the Planning Department but was approved by the Building Department only. Lot 4, Block 3 - Shows the wetland as a utility and drainage easement on the registered land survey, therefore, it was approved under that condition. The subject residence, which is located on Lot 5, Block 3, has an extremely small buildable area. The setback dimensions were overlooked by staff and the building permit was approved. All 5 residences surrounding the subject property have existing decks and 50% of those properties are encroaching on the wetland setback. Therefore, granting the variance will allow the subject property to blend with these existing standards without departing downward from them (Attachment #1). In addition, we note that the home on this site is comparable with others in the neighborhood and that a deck is considered to be a reasonable amenity. bo The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. The conditions upon which this petition for a variance is based is not applicable generally to other properties within the same zoning classification outside of the immediate area. C, The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. This does not appear to be the case. The applicant is simply attempting to utilize the parcel for the single family residential uses it was approved for. Stech Variance June 17, 1997 Page 4 d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self created hardship. The hardship is not self created. The hardship began when the City made the decision to approve the lot as a buildable lot. Parcel size and setback measurements where overlooked when approving the plat. Since the year 1989, staff has been reviewing building plans for proposed residences and locating any sliding doors that might be used for a future deck and alerting the homeowner as to whether they may be able to build a deck depending on the setbacks of the home to the property line. Staff has also been working to clarify wetland locations both during platting and building permit review. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare of injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. The deck and porch will be located within 30 feet of the Class B wetland and will be constructed above the high water mark. The ~vetland is heavily protected by existing vegetation and staff feels comfortable with allowing a deck and a porch to be constructed within 30 feet of the edge of the wetland. 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 increases the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The granting of the variance will allow a deck and porch to be constructed at a reasonable distance from the adjoining properties. Therefore, it will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to those properties, nor will it 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. RECOMMENDATION For the above findings, staff is recommending the following motion: The Board of Adjustments and Appeals approves Variance 97-5 for a 45 foot setback variance from a natural wetland for the construction of a deck with the following condition: 1. The applicant uses Type/51 erosion control along the edge of the wetland. St0ch Variance Jur~e 17, 1997 Page 5 ATTACHMENTS o Plat map showing existing setbacks from the edge of the wetland. Site plan showing proposed deck. Application. S~/4 cot of. Se:. 36. ., DESIGNER/BUILDE~ 3941 COLGATE A~EN ~ iE MINNETONKA, MN ~345 CONTRACTOR lICENSE 5:6033 FAX: 404-1380 BUSINESS: 404-13 RESIDENTIAL SERVICES Complete Custom Remodeling and Home Office Solutions Since 1979 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: ADDRESS: ~/'~ TELEPHONE (Day time) ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: __ Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit __ Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit Non-conforming Use Permit _~ Variance Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development* Zoning Appeal Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site PJan Review* X Subdivision* Notification Sign Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CUPISPR/VACNAR/W AP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) TOTALFEE$ A list of ali property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. *Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2'' X 11" reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. .: ** Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract :NOTE-When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. ~OCAT, ON LE~ DESCRIPTION TOTAL ACI~EAGE : WE3'I._AND$ PRESENT P~~ONING P~QUEST~ ZONING YES NO PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION ]:~_ASON FOR THIS REQUEST ,-- ~-- '~ ~-~ Th~s applica:ion 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 1o determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. Qo determ~n~on of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written rice of apj~lication deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. 'Th~'s is to ce,'tify that ! am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requ'-ements with regard to this request. This applicat, ion 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 Owrmr's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this applica~n and the fee owner has also signed this application. I w~ 'keep myseff informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand :hat additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorizatior to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of m y ,know~ed~e. -the c'~ hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions a-re approved by the applicant. Sic Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. if not cont~ cted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. NoT CE OF PUBLIC HEARING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS ~.....i. T~ ESDAY, JUNE 17, 1997 fY2' / ~;~:~ -- PleasantLV~ew Ro' ..... at 6:00 p.m. ,, ,. Ci.ty Hall - 690 Coulter Drive ~__ . ."-; ,. ;~.. ~ ~ "..-~ ,... ../.'. ,. ~.../.../. ,. '~'~ ~ .-_..~.. '~'?---..,..~ -:-': ~ ,. ........ :: ................... · ........ Council Chambers \',~"~" ~ "~.',~'.",~ /""... ~ .~>.' ..~- ~ ~ ......; ~-. .... ::~-. ...' %" / % .-'~. ~,'/-?' ~ i ~ -.-. -: · .A . -~ ' .... "?¥ ?,.. /.:" ~ 'i .. SUBJECT: Variance to Construct Deck within the 75 foot Wetland Setback APPLICANT: Roger and Gail Stech LOCATI3N: 491 Trapline Lane NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applica ~ts, Roger and Gail Stech, is requesting a variance to allow the construction of a deck within the 75 foot wetland setback on property zoned PUD and located at 491 Trapline Lane. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the develol:'er's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meetin.c, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staf' will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The 3eveloper will present plans on the project. 3. Con'ments are received from the public. 4. Publ'c hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questior s and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someon; about this project, please contact Sharmin at 937-1900 ext. 120. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. ', Notice o' this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on June 5, 1997. CITY OF CHANHASSEN C/O CITY TREASURER DONALD W & JEWEL K HASEK OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 690 COULTER DR PO BOX 147 6310 STAGHORN DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MI~ 55317 ROGER L & GAYLE D STECK OR CURRENT RESIDENT 491 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MIq 55317 CITY OF CHANHASSEN C/O CITY TREASURER OR CURRENT RESIDENT 690 COULTER DR PO BOX 147 CHA_NHASSEN, MN 55317 GRADY M FERGUSON & SANDRA HUGHES FERGUSON OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6311 STAGHORN LN CHANHASSEN, PIN 55317 ANDREW J REUL & JENNIFER SIX OR CURRENT RESIDENT 500 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DWAYNE R & FRA_NCINE SIGLER OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6397 OXBOW BND CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DANIEL & VIRGINIA B ANDERSON OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6399 OXBOW BND CHAAHiASSEN, M/q 55317 M_ARK J & TERRY J DENUCCI OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6301 SUMMIT CIR CHANHASSEN, Mlq 55317 DALE A & DIANNA K FEHRENBACH OR CURRENT RESIDENT 421 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 GERALD & CAN-DICE CRANDALL OR CURRENT RESIDENT 501 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DUANE L & MARCIA E MCCONKEY OR CURRENT RESIDENT 401 TRAPPERS PASS CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JOHN C & GERI~NNE MANN OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6401 OXBOW BND CHANPLASSEN, ~ 55317 THOMAS L & ELLEN C MARSH OR CURRENT RESIDENT 430 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DAVID E & JUDY J BENDA OR CURRENT RESIDENT 411 TRAPPERS PASS CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 FRANK J MESSINA JR & ROSEMARY M MESSINA OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6403 OXBOW BND CHA_NHASSEN, MIW 55317 JOHN W & LINDA L MICHAEL OR CURRENT RESIDENT 431 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, Mlq 55317 JAMES J & KAREN D'AMBRISI OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6321 STAGHORN LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 TIMOTHY P & JEANNE M PIETRINI OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6405 OXBOW BND CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 J JEFFREY RUEGEMER & COLLEEN D RUEGEMER OR CURRENT RESIDENT 460 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JAMES A & JUDITH E EARNSHAW OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6407 OXBOW BND CHA1WHASSEN, MN 55317 DONALD E & ¥~ARY A JACOBY OR CURRENT RESIDENT 461 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 R DAVID & JOYCE E SUBERVILLE OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6408 OXBOW BND CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 AARON J & SHEILA K ROTH OR CURRENT RESIDENT 480 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CYNTHIA G FRENCH OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6300 STAGHORN LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 '. ROBERT A & LINDA J HARRINGTON OR CURRENT RESIDENT 481 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317