Loading...
CAS-07_DONOHUE VARIANCE - 6561 TROENDLE CIRCLEThomas J. Campbell Roger N. Knutson Thomas M. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Joel J. Jamnik Andrea McDowell Poehler Soren M. Mattick John F. Kelly Henry A. Schaeffer, III Alina Schwartz Samuel J. Edmunds Marguerite M. McCarron 1380 Corporate Center Curve Suite 317 • Eagan, MN 55121 651-452-5000 Fax 651-452-5550 www.ck-law.com CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association August 6, 2012 Ms. Kim Meuwissen City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Re: Chanhassen — Miscellaneous Recording Dear Kim: Pursuant to your letter of June 26, 2012, enclosed herewith is the original recorded Variance 2012-07. Please note that this Variance was recorded with the Carver County Recorder on July 2, 2012, as Document No. A557652. If you have any questions regarding the above, please give me a call. Very truly yours, CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association By: Carole J. Hoeft v cjh Legal Assistant Enclosure CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED AUG U b 2012 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT SCANNED Document No. OFFICE OF THE • A 557652 COUNTYRECORDER CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA Fee $46.00 Receipt# RA 2012000067 Certified Recorded on 7R12012 at 12:59 ❑ AMn PM CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA vVARIANCE 2012-07 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants the following variance: A 6.9 percent variance from the 25 percent hard cover limitation to permit hard cover of 31.9 percent on property zoned Single Family Residential (RSF). 2. Property. The variance is for property located at 6561 Troendle Circle in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as Lot 4, Block 2, Troendle Addition. 3. Condition. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions: a. The owner shall remove the existing patio surface and stairs at the rear of the home and re -grade the site to maintain or improve existing drainage patterns. b. Building permits are required for the construction of the porch and deck. c. The structure must comply with Minnesota State Building Code. 4. Lapse. If within one (1) year of the issuance of this variance the allowed construction has not been substantially completed, this variance shall lapse. SCANNED Dated: June 19, 2012 (SEAL) STATE OF MINNESOTA (ss COUNTY OF CARVER CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: 7 L K7q Thomas A. Furlong, M v AND: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thisa0ay of 2012 by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor and Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of thea of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to authority granted by its City Council. DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 ^, KAREN J. ENGELHARDT Notary Public -Minnesota Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 Mayor Furlong: Any other comments? If not I would certainly entertain a motion. Councilman McDonald: Mr. Mayor if we could, Mr. Laufenburger did a lot I think to help to bring this forward. I would like for him to make the motion. Councilman Laufenburger: Be happy to do that. Mayor Furlong: Councilman Laufenburger. Councilman Laufenburger: Thank you. Mr. Mayor, I move that in recognition of Al Klingelhutz's lifelong commitment to the betterment of Chanhassen and Carver County, and in recognition of the prominent role that he played in the acquisition and development of Lake Ann Park, the Chanhassen City Council approves the re -naming of the Lake Ann Park Hilltop Picnic Shelter to the AI Klingelhutz Memorial Pavilion. Councilwoman Ernst: Second. Mayor Furlong: A motion's been made and seconded. Any further discussion on the motion? Seeing none let's proceed with the vote. Councilman Laufenburger moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded that in recognition of AI Klingelhutz's lifelong commitment to the betterment of Chanhassen and Carver County, and in recognition of the prominent role that he played in the acquisition and development of Lake Ann Park, the Chanhassen City Council approves the re -naming of the Lake Ann Park Hilltop Picnic Shelter to the All Klingelhutz Memorial Pavilion. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. 620 WEST 96'm STREET VARIANCE: REOUEST FOR VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20-904 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN SHANNON RIEGERT. Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the City Council. This variance request ypeared before the Planning Commission at their September 18t' meeting and it's located on 620 West 96 Street which is just to the west of 101 and north of Pioneer Trail. The applicant is requesting a variance from the 1,000 square foot accessory structure maximum to construct a 2,560 square foot accessory structure on property that's zoned Agricultural Estate. The land use, future land use designation of this area is low density. The applicant's purchased the property in 1998 with the intention of construction an accessory structure. The stated intent for the 40 by 60 accessory structure is work for additional, is for additional storage and work space. Again, and we put some of the background and the accessory structure, kind of the background of this area in and of itself. There are other accessory structures in this area which I'll go into in a little bit more detail but again the applicant when he purchased the home, you can see did provide for a driveway and stated at the Planning Commission that there was a pad. It's really unclear to see exactly how that works for clearly there was a driveway put 1 place. In addition changes were made to the home. And, whoops. To the home. The garage, accessory garage was removed and an attached garage was put in place. On the first page of the staff report we did note too that there is a Manage 11 wetland adjacent to the Pioneer Trail which we did not ask to be delineated but there is a wetland in the southern area of this property. While this is a 4 acre lot, again it is somewhat encumbered with the wetland in and of itself. So the applicable zoning regulations are the attached maximum 1,000 square foot accessory structure. This ordinance was adopted in May of 2007 in response to contractors and complaints that we had throughout •CANNED Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 the city for home occupations. In the history of the city, at one time conditional use permits were allowed for contractors yards and over time, because there was no cap on those people purchased large lots in agricultural zones as the city intended to urbanize, as we stated in the comprehensive plan, it's not the city's intent to have large acre lots in the future. That would be in the rural part of the county and our vision for the community was to provide for more urban development, but that doesn't mean we don't have large lot rural lots in the city. We do also have lots that will, may never have urban services to it that are larger 2 1/2 estate acre lots, and certainly a 1,000 square foot accessory structure is permitable for those types of uses. We also have other properties that do have horse barns. Adjacent large horse barns in this so because some of these properties weren't being used for agricultural purposes and we were pursuing a lot of these also through court action that the city undertook a study looking at where these were happening and decided to put the 1,000 square foot cap on the accessory structures. At the time that the ordinance went through the Planning Commission and the City Council took a look at the ordinance and felt that there was you know, should we, what was the right number? What was, for maximum square footage, again it really came down to looking at kind of the average lot size and again providing those at 2 1/2 acres. I guess the feeling was felt at that time if there was someone that still had horse property and wanted the agricultural type use, that you would pursue, they could certainly pursue a variance as with any other person that wanted administrative relief could come through and ask for a variance request in this circumstance. So then this neighborhood itself, and this is some of the factors that the Planning Commission looked at. Mr. Riegert in this circumstance you know purchased the home intending to put the accessory structure on as he was going through his modifications to his home. That was the last part, last phase I guess of his plan and the ordinance had passed prior to that. We did look at the summary of the accessory structures in this now most of these were built prior to the cap of the 1,000 square foot minimum. Some of these there's no records of building permits being pulled of some of the more recent ones but that kind of gives you a summary of the area. I just wanted also to describe there is a distinction between what's on the north side of West 9e where those lots are a little bit smaller than on the south side of West 96th. Where those lots again are approximately 4 acres, plus or minus. That's also again encumbered with a wetland on that southern portion. So with that at the Planning Commission meeting on September 18`h they did hold a public hearing. Some of the neighbors did speak about the character of their area and certainly the character of that neighborhood is unique but the Planning Commission did vote 4 to 2 to approve the variance for a 2,000 square foot. A little less than what the applicant had requested. Because a 75% majority is required to approve the variance and this, it didn't meet that, their recommendation therefore, their action therefore forms a recommendation. So what the staff had revised then would be the recommendation for the, for what the Planning Commission had recommended which was the additional 1,000 variance to the, was permitted for the 1,000 and also had modified Findings of Fact to reflect the 1,000 variance to the 1,000 square foot minimum. So with that I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for Ms. Aanenson. Mr. Laufenburger. Councilman Laufenburger: Actually Kate my first question relates to the vote. The decision that was, occurred at the Planning Commission was 4 to 2 and that was not a, it was a majority but it was not a. Kate Aanenson: Super majority. It needs 75% of those present voting. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. So 75% of the Planning Commission members present would essentially have negated the need for the action to come to City Council, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: Is it, I'm sorry to clarify, is it the members present or of the entire, of the 7 members? u,.:.. :e Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 Kate Aanenson: It's the members present. Mayor Furlong: I think it's moot either way because... Kate Aanenson: Yeah, it's right. Right. But let me just clarify that your question Councilman Laufenburger, the question was, because he wanted 2,500 he still has the right to, if he wants the 2,500, he still had the right to appeal. He could have accepted that so there's two courses of action. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. Kate Aanenson: He could have said I'll take the 2,000 and accept that or he could say I would still like to get the 2,500 and still appeal that recommendation. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay, so the action tonight though is the City Council is acting on the recommendation of 2,000, or the 1,000 square foot variance. Is that correct? Kate Aanenson: Right. What we had recommended, what the staff had recommended was denial. The Planning Commission went above that and gave the additional 1,000. His request is for the 2,500. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay, so the Planning Commission required, the word you used is super majority or 75%, so Mr. Knutson why is it that only a City Council requires only a majority vote? Roger Knutson: Because that's what your ordinance provides. Councilman Laufenburger: Man of few words, thank you Mr. Knutson. Roger Knutson: I believe the philosophy behind it was, if the Planning Commission is going to act you want to make sure that it's, it's pretty unanimous agreement for that decision and if there isn't pretty near unanimous decision for that decision you wanted the oversight of the City Council to review it. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay. So specifically the vote to, the approval requires a simple majority. 3 vote to 2, is that correct Mr. Knutson tonight? Kate Aanenson: Yes. Roger Knutson: Yes. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay, thank you. Roger Knutson: I paused because in one city, it takes 4 votes so I had to, where I work but simple majority here. Councilman Laufenburger: Okay, thank you. Mr. Mayor, that's all 1 had. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other questions for Ms. Aanenson? Mr. McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Okay well thank you for clarifying that but then if 1 understand correctly if we wanted to as a City Council we could change this to a 1,560 foot variance if we wanted to. Roger Knutson: You could make it less, yes. Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 Kate Aanenson: Or more. Councilman McDonald: Wouldn't that be more? Mayor Furlong: Wait, the variance. Roger Knutson: Oh excuse me. Mayor Furlong: Of the 1,560. Councilman McDonald: Right, yeah. The variance is 1,560 not the 1,000. Roger Knutson: That would be more, yes. Mayor Furlong: Or I guess for clarification we could deny it. Roger Knutson: Yes. Councilman McDonald: And do less if we wanted to, okay. Mayor Furlong: So it's a recommendation coming from the Planning Commission. Councilman McDonald: Then the other question I have for Kate is that I'm looking at the properties and it looks as though there's, there's 7 of them on West 961h Street and I look at what they all have as far as accessories and it looks like everybody exceeds the 1,000, except for the one lot where they've only got a 1,300 square foot accessory but the rest of them, I see 6,000. 4,000. 3,000. 4,000. I mean the norm appears to be on this street that you know over time, yeah in excess of 1,000 square feet is the norm for allowing people with out buildings on these lots. Kate Aanenson: Certainly, and I think that's what the Planning Commission took into consideration when they're giving the additional 1,000. Again they went through the findings for the variances and struggled with that a little bit. Again we talk about the character on the north side. Again some of them are, have horses. Some don't. Some had old contractors yards that were permitted at that time. The position that we took when we put together the ordinance, and in 2007 that we saw it as these buildings last a long, long time and these aren't you know, whether it's storing things or the next buyer ends up putting a cabinet shop and those are ones that we spend time trying to resolve neighborhood conflicts. Now this went into some of the discussion with the Planning Commission because you have like minded people living next to each other but we do have some situations where they're not, depending on how the neighborhood navigates. That was one of the reasons why the staff put in there, if the Planning Commission did choose to permit something that they put a condition in there that says that no home occupation be permitted. Councilman McDonald: Okay. Now there was a public hearing at the Planning Commission, is that right? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Councilman McDonald: Did anyone speak in opposition to the 2,500 foot building itself? Kate Aanenson: No. No. The Planning Commission went through the findings of what they felt was appropriate. 10 Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 Councilman McDonald: Okay, and again the lots on the north side of West 96's Street are smaller because, well there is a wetland up there. Kate Aanenson: Well no. The wetland's on the south side. Those are just smaller lots. There is a wetland on the, on this side. Councilman McDonald: Okay, on the map it looks as though the lots are smaller. Kate Aanenson: They are. Councilman McDonald: Okay. Kate Aanenson: But it's not because of the wetlands. They're just smaller. Councilman McDonald: Okay, it's just because the lots are smaller. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, the wetland's in this area. Yes. Councilman McDonald: Now the other thing that you brought up in the findings in the staff report was that, okay what we're trying to do is to prevent I guess businesses operating on these lots. Is that correct? Kate Aanenson: (Yes). Councilman McDonald: And what you said was that you know if we do allow this, in the future we tend to have a problem if someone decides well I'm going to run a business off of my lot. Is that correct that we have a problem enforcing that? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Correct. There are some, there were some landscaping businesses being operated out of that area and again you have, it's residential traffic. It's not set up for commercial type traffic. Some people like to store additional things and part of the point is that we brought into the comprehensive plan, we cited that section to talk about we do provide zoning for those types of, for storage so again those buildings are going to last a long time so over, it's hard to think that far in the future but as planners, you know you're looking 20 years down the road and we look at this area, we're going to have the biggest change in the city in this coming, in this super area in the next 10 to 15 years and I certainly you know is try to find that right balance of certainly if Mr. Riegert could have built his property sooner had he known this he probably would have but we're just apprising you know that these are the concerns that we have going into the future. Trying to apprise the Planning Commission and the council. Councilman McDonald: Okay, and then the question I've got is, we can put a requirement in as part of the variance to limit what could go in. It could only be for personal use, is that correct? Can we do that? Roger Knutson: Yes, you can. Councilman McDonald: Okay. And then could you explain to me where does the problem come in with the enforcement? Is that just because it ends up requiring court action and time and effort to stop any businesses? Roger Knutson: That's pretty much it but part of it is, these buildings are enclosed and we don't know what's happening inside them because we don't, the only way we normally would find out is on a Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 complaint basis. Some, a new person can buy one of these homes with this and not gone through the process, even though the variance is recorded. They don't know what they shouldn't do or don't care and then they all of a sudden you have a wood working shop or you have whatever, a business going on in there. Then you have to take enforcement action. Councilman McDonald: Okay. And so at that point then we would be dependent upon a complaint from the neighbors because of either excess traffic on the road or noise or something along those lines. Roger Knutson: That's right. We don't go knocking on doors. Councilman McDonald: Right. Okay, I guess that's all the questions I had for staff and everybody. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other questions for staff? Ms. Aanenson, a couple of them and keep this picture up. This particular property the acreage for this parcel is 4 acres. Kate Aanenson: 4 acres, correct. Mayor Furlong: About 4 acres and how much, and maybe it was easier to see on an earlier slide but there's, the wetland on the south side that runs across all these. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Correct. Mayor Furlong: About how, do you have a sense of what the buildable or the non -wetland acreage is on this parcel? Approximately. Is it half or is it? Kate Aanenson: No, it's probably, maybe if it's on the first. Here's the entire parcel. Mayor Furlong: Okay. So it's quite a bit though. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Mayor Furlong: So even though it's 4 acres it's Kate Aanenson: Correct. If that was to come in today we would exclude that from the lot calculation. 1 mean this is an older lot but today we don't include this in the lot calculation. Mayor Furlong: If it was to come in in a plat. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: You're saying if we were to plat this the wetland would be delineated and put into an outlot or something and then the parcel would be. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Yeah and they could count it towards the hard coverage but we'd also have it, we'd have a setback from that too. We believe it's far enough away from the wetland edge but we'd ask for that with the building permit to just make sure based on contours where that would be. We didn't ask for a delineation. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And the accessory structures, you said this is guided for residential. Single family residential but it's currently in an Ag zoning. 12 Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 Kate Aanenson: Correct. It's actually guided in the, for low density. Assembling. Mayor Furlong: Low density. Kate Aanenson: Yep, so it could be further subdivided. Is the likelihood of that with these structures there in place, probably not in the short term. When I say short term maybe you know. Mayor Furlong: As a planner would say. Kate Aanenson: As a planner would say short term. More than likely because those buildings actually have you know pretty longer life span now that they're steel. Mayor Furlong: Not just the accessory buildings but the homes as well. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Correct. Yep. Mayor Furlong: Is there in a residential, low density residential is there a limit on accessory structures...? Kate Aanenson: Only by square footage so if you had an accessory structure you could have a couple of them at by 10 by 10 so long as it maximized that 1,000 square feet. Mayor Furlong: Okay, so the 1,000 square feet is the same. Kate Aanenson: Cumulous, yeah. Mayor Furlong: For a low density residential zoning. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Here's it, so the limit of the ordinance of 1,000 square feet of a single or multiple accessory structures is the same in both the low density residential and in the Ag? Kate Aanenson: Correct. And again going back to that is that long term wise we didn't see, there's rural residential lots. There's not that much Ag that has this type of subdivision on it. The rural residential lots are 2 1/2 acres so. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay. And are those also 1,000 square feet in rural residential? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: How much do we see in terms of variance requests or applications for accessory structures in the large lot or the? Kate Aanenson: Not too many. No. Because once we capped it we've seen a couple that had unique, maybe they wanted to go 10 feet over, 20 feet over or you know less than 100 because they needed an RV or something like that but not for this much just straight storage sort of thing. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And the others that are there, those were, those pre -dated the current ordinance? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. 13 Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 Mayor Furlong: Or at least to the extent we know. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Yes. Mayor Furlong: Did they come through and get building permits for those that we know? Kate Aanenson: Some of them no. Mayor Furlong: Some of them no, okay. Alright. And they, your sense of when the other accessory structures in the neighborhood were built or the last. Kate Aanenson: Well some of these homes were built in, for example this home was built in 1966 so based on the, when we went through all the PUD's there's not a lot of building permit records back then when those were put in place. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Kate Aanenson: So again the ones that we have better records on is when they came in and asked for a contractor's yard which were allowed as a conditional use so some of those propagated other contractors yards in an area where they're not there permitted or not so. Mayor Furlong: And so, so with contractors yards, if those were approved as a conditional use, are those still with the property? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Or are they. Kate Aanenson: They run with the property unless the City was to go through and to void those for failing to follow the conditions of approval. Mayor Furlong: And does this particular parcel have that conditional use available to it? Kate Aanenson: No. No, no. He's just using it for storage. He has a business somewhere else so. Mayor Furlong: Right but that doesn't sit here now? Kate Aanenson: Yep, no it doesn't. Mayor Furlong: With a prior use was not consistent with that. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Okay. And then with regard to businesses, and obviously this is a concern when you're dealing with a residential area even if it's, regardless of the underlying zoning. I can certainly understand that. Is there, is there a restriction? Any type of home based business? 1 mean there are some home businesses that we talked about that are acceptable. Kate Aanenson: Yes. Yes. 14 1 Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 Mayor Furlong: Does our ordinance delineate those? Kate Aanenson: Yes, our ordinance specifically, that's our number one complaint in the city. Throughout the city ... any area throughout the city the number one complaint is contractors yards. Whether it's a landscaping business or the like, that's probably. They block mailboxes when someone's running out of their home and typically it's because people park in front of the house and kind of mobilize for the day but people do piano lessons. People do those sort of things that they can do out of the home and those are regulated in the city's home occupation ordinance by a number of trips. Number of outside employees. By state law you're allowed to have daycare. If you have more than 6 then it's conditional use and we look at how many people are there for help and then where they're parking. Do they have adequate back out? Those sort of things. Backing up and not blocking traffic. Again when you're in a residential neighborhood and people are going to school buses and those sort of things, got to make sure we don't have those kind of conflicting. Obviously there's probably a neighborhood tolerance in here that people move in and they're willing to accept some of that if there's additional trips in this area. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Are there some contractors working in this neighborhood right now that you're aware of? Kate Aanenson: If you were to look at some of the vehicles parked in the area, 1 would venture to say. Mayor Furlong: Very likely. Kate Aanenson: Yeah. Mayor Furlong: Or perhaps. Okay. Alright. And then I guess this is a question, maybe this is a follow up for Councilman McDonald's question on enforcement of the neighborhood, or the residential home based businesses. We respond to complaints. What is the level of effort that the City has to go through in responding to that complaint if indeed there was a prohibitive home based business operating? Mr. Knutson. Roger Knutson: If we determine that an unlawful business was operating, you start off by phone calls and letters and tell them to stop it and we'd ask to come over and inspect it. If they wouldn't let us inspect it then we'd get an administrative search warrant and if we found that they were operating illegally and they wouldn't stop voluntarily then we go to court. Issue a citation. Mayor Furlong: So there is time and effort and depending on cooperation or lack thereof it could be more in some cases. Roger Knutson: Yes. Mayor Furlong: The Planning Commission, when they made their recommendation which turned out to be a recommendation, one of their conditions was to prohibit the use of a home based business consistent with the ordinance 1 would assume. Having that in place, is that, I mean is that do anything more than just having our nuisance ordinance in place? Because it's recorded with the property. Roger Knutson: That's it. Mayor Furlong: Okay. But there's additional notice there? Roger Knutson: An average person I would assume doesn't, when they go to buy a piece of property doesn't go down to the City and check the zoning ordinance requirements or look at the city code but 15 Chanhassen City Council —October 8, 2012 when you have something memorialized on your title hopefully, no guarantees but hopefully that puts you on notice, or it should about what the rules are. Mayor Furlong: Would someone doing a title search or something like that would see that then. Roger Knutson: Yes. If you look on the title it would be right on there memorialized. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for staff at this point? If not is, are Mr. and Mrs. Riegert here? Andy Riegert: I am. Mayor Furlong: Oh, would you like, any comments you'd like to make this evening as the applicant? Andy Riegert: Hi, my name is Andy Riegert. I live at 620 West 96s' Street, Chanhassen. I, you know I asked myself what do I like about Chanhassen and a lot of the same stuff comes back to when we were talking about Al and how it's a small town and we still have a broad base of citizens and a unique characteristic of the town and so I don't want to be put into a small piece of, you know I don't want to, I want to be able to have different types of people in this town and I think we're a unique area obviously and this type of building obviously fits into this area and this was something we planned on doing a long time ago when we wouldn't have had to go through this process. Unfortunately it didn't work out at the time but we're trying to move forward now and I just, 1 don't see how it wouldn't fit in well with the neighborhood. The talk about the home occupation. Well I've got three small children and I certainly don't want people driving in and out of my driveway at all hours of the day and so I don't know how more to say that that's not something that I want to do and when you're talking about it up here I just want to jump up and say you don't have to worry about that because that's not at all my intention. I just moved by business out to Waconia for at least 5 years so I have no intention of running my business out of my back yard and quite honestly I don't want any of my neighbors to either and it's good. It's been a good neighborhood and it's, we don't have contractors running in and out like some people think so we just kind of like to, we have different hobbies I guess than a lot of people have around the area so, and I think in some of the packets, I don't know if you have them or not but it shows some of the kind of things that I would look to store in the building which is why I had originally asked for the I think 2,500 square feet or whatever it was so, but when they recommended the 2,000 square foot and then the putting some wording on there about not being able to have a home occupation, that sounds like a good deal to me so I have no problem with that and I think that's a good compromise so. That's all I have to say, thanks. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any questions for Mr. Riegert? Councilman McDonald. Councilman McDonald: Then if I understand you correctly then you're okay with the recommendation the way it is for only a 1,000 foot variance to give you a 2,000 foot building and you're fine with that? You don't need the 2,500 square feet then. Andy Riegert: I would like the 2,500 square feet. However I want you to understand that I have no intention to run a home occupation out of this building and if that's what it takes to prove that then I'm willing to compromise. Councilman McDonald: Okay. No more questions. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. The only comment I'll make regard to intentions, and our questions about home businesses and such like that, as I'm sure you can appreciate. When we're looking at this or especially city staff are looking at things, they're looking very long term and knowing that you're not 16 Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 going to be the only owner of this property forever and so at the time you sell there'll be somebody else buying it and their intentions may be different than what your's are today and so when we're looking at this and considering this, we need to be thinking of long term. Andy Riegert: Yeah. Mayor Furlong: Because these buildings will last a long time. I mean that's the intention. You put a large investment into them when you erect them and you expect them to last a number of years and perhaps after you own the property too so that's why, so I'm just explaining why we're asking those questions. Andy Riegert: No, fair enough. I understand. Mayor Furlong: You know your intentions may change or more importantly, and even if they don't, you may not be the owner of the property while the building is still here so. Andy Riegert: Yeah, and I'd be willing to put a window in so you can look in and see what's in there. Mayor Furlong: I think we have an ordinance against that, don't we? People looking in windows. I don't know. Sergeant. Okay, very good. Thank you. Oh, question for the applicant? CouncilmanLaufenburger: Yeah, just a question. Andy can you just talk a little bit about what you've done to prepare this space for this building and what you've done and when did you do that. Andy Riegert: Yeah, I moved in in 1998 and I think it was the following summer, 1 got a permit to put in a second driveway so I hired a contractor to do all the excavation and bring in like a crushed rock for all the driveway and then we had a pad leveled, you can kind of see it on the picture but it's kind of rough and grainy but about 80 by 100 pad with a gravel surface so basically flatten it all out and just got it ready for it and then due to financial concerns we just put the project on hold so, until we wanted to move forward now and that's when we discovered there was a change in the ordinance. Councilman Laufenburger: So in your view the pad is essentially it's construction ready. Andy Riegert: Yeah. Yep. Councilman Laufenburger. Okay, thank you Andy. Andy Riegert: Thanks. Councilman McDonald: So can I follow up on that then is the pad set up for the 2,500 square foot? Andy Riegert: Yeah, it is. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Riegert? Thank you. Andy Riegert: Thank you. Mayor Furlong: There was a public hearing held at the Planning Commission so unless there's any significant changes between the Planning Commission and here, I don't know that we need to have public comment this evening, unless that's up to the council. There was some and I appreciate the residents who did come and speak at the Planning Commission for their comments as well. With that, any follow up 17 Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 questions that people have of staff or any thoughts or comments on this request? Councilman McDonald, thoughts? Councilman McDonald: Yeah, I have some thoughts on this. I mean initially whenever I saw this you know I wasn't in favor of the variance because, well I'm just not in favor of giving out variances but then when I looked at all the properties in the neighborhood and everything and I see that everybody else has got something on there it's like, it wouldn't be fair to this gentleman to restrict him to the 1,000 square foot, especially when all of his neighbors already exceed all of that. And again the property at this particular point in town is very unique in the way that it's laid out and what the people do with the properties and what their expectations are with the properties so you know in looking at this 1 guess I probably differ from what the Planning Commission would have come up with. I would be in favor of again going to the full 2,500 square foot. You know the restrictions that we looked at, I would be willing to keep those in place to give us some protection within the city because again ownership does change hands but I really see no reason not to grant the 1,500 square foot variance that the homeowner actually requested. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Any thoughts or comments? Councilman Laufenburger: Mr. Mayor. Mayor Furlong: Mr. Laufenburger. Councilman Laufenburger: I just, I admire Mr. Riegert. He moved in in '98. A year later he drew a permit. Now maybe that was, I'm not going to call it naivety on his part because obviously some of his neighbors didn't draw permits for some of the things that they wanted but here's a guy who wanted to do everything you know legally so to speak and I'm pleased that he's willing to accept a compromise of 2,000 square feet but I kind of favor Mr. McDonald's thought of even 2,560 square feet which I think is the, it's a rectangular building. I'm not sure what the measurements are. 40 by 60 or something. 42 by 60 but that certainly falls within the range of the other buildings in this area and so I'm in favor of granting the variance and I'm kind of leaning towards the 1,560 square foot variance versus that which came from the Planning Commission. That's just my thoughts. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other thoughts and comments. Councilwoman Ernst. Councilwoman Ernst: I would also be in favor of supporting the 1,560 square foot variance. I mean I haven't heard where it would create, where it's going against any Minnesota code or where you know there's any complications there and I feel that he's followed all the right paths and the conditions are really stated in here so as long as we have the conditions in here as Councilman McDonald referred to, I see no problem supporting the 1,560 square foot. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Councilwoman Tjornhom, any comments? Councilwoman Tjornhom: No, I concur with Councilman McDonald and Laufenburger. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thanks. The, quick question Ms. Aanenson. On the condition as it's laid out here, I think it's in the staff report, page 7 where it says the condition for the accessory structure may not he used for the purpose of a home occupation as defined in the Chanhassen City Code. Does our code say any home occupation and then excludes ones that are allowed or how is the code set up? Is it, is this wording sufficient for what I'm sensing the intent of the council and the Planning Commission was? 18 Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 Roger Knutson: I believe it is. It specifies what home occupations are allowed and what aren't allowed and this is not zoned commercial so, the only sort of commercial use you could have there are home occupation. So if you don't allow home occupations then no commercial activity can take place there. Kate Aanenson: If I can clarify that. Accessory structures are not, you cannot do a home occupation in accessory structure. It has to be in the principle structure so. Mayor Furlong: In any accessory structure you cannot have a home occupation? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Roger Knutson: And that's because of the concern that, a home occupation's supposed to be small, contained and still supposed to look like a home and when you start adding. Mayor Furlong: You start adding on... Roger Knutson: Yes, when you start putting them in the garage and you start putting them in the accessory structures, then they take on a life of their own. Mayor Furlong: Then it's time. Roger Knutson: It becomes a real commercial use. Mayor Furlong: To relocate the business to a place where it's zoned for businesses. Roger Knutson: Yes sir. Mayor Furlong: Okay so any home occupancy or home based home occupation, and that would also include any other types of businesses as well within the accessory structure or is that all inclusive? Roger Knutson: Other than home occupations, commercial uses of this property are already prohibited. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Roger Knutson: Because it's, the way it's zoned. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Councilman Laufenburger: Mr. Mayor I have just a question of Kate. What restrictions, or not restrictions but what, what can Andy, besides building this structure, what else can he add to the structure? For example can he bring electric utility to the structure? Kate Aanenson: People often do. Councilman Laufenburger: Can he bring water to the structure? Kate Aanenson: People often do. Councilman Laufenburger: Is there anything that would prohibit from doing that? Kate Aanenson: No. 19 Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 Councilman Laufenburger: Can he bring natural gas to the structure? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilman Laufenburger: So he can bring any utility that he chooses as long as it, as long as the construction complies with the code. Kate Aanenson: Correct. The thing that we would look for if it becomes a living space then you can't have two living spaces so if someone was to put in more than a bath and kitchenette, that sort of thing then we would look at that. Councilman Laufenburger. But I'm thinking, you know he wants to you know snowmobile. He wants to possibly do some maintenance. I think he said that he has an auto refurbishing business, hobby. Andy Riegert: Hobby, yeah. Councilman Laufenburger: Yeah hobby, but he may, electricity I could see. Gas to have an interior heater of some sort, okay. Alright, thank you. Councilman McDonald: Mayor if I could, could I follow up on Mr. Laufenburger. Then by having the building permit, that would give us the assurances that this doesn't turn into an auxiliary living space, is that correct? Kate Aanenson: Yes, assuming permits, are done, yep Councilman McDonald: Okay, thank you Mayor Furlong: And I understand and generally concur with the comments made by the council in terms of this in large part because of the current zoning of agricultural versus residential, even though it's guided for that, and also I think when we look at the neighborhood as it exists. If I'm not mistaken I think this is the only property on the south side of the road, at least within the picture we received, that does not have an accessory structure and I think the smallest one was 1,300 if I'm not mistaken, and maybe that's just the width of the picture you know so 1. Kate Aanenson: ...based on our computer Mayor Furlong: Based on computers and such like that so certainly within the neighborhood it makes sense. I think the challenge here for the council is, and I appreciate and understand your comments is, is this an ordinance that needs to be reviewed or is the variance process the process that we want to work with here? If, because what I'm hearing is, it makes sense. It's reasonable. With the variance process there are standards that we need to consider. Practical difficulties and consistencies with general purposes of the chapter and the comp plan and there are, those are some challenges. Now in the current zoning it works, and the guiding it would be a challenge and so I think that's a question for the council. If this becomes an issue, that it may be something that we have to look at and understand why we have our ordinance the way we do and perhaps the benefit of having the ordinance at 1,000 and going through the variance process is it allows us then to apply certain conditions which, as Mr. Knutson said gives more awareness to future property owners. Certainly it's clear to the current property owners of what can and can't be done there and we're seeing some problems and maybe that is the benefit of having the process. Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 Kate Aanenson: Yeah 1 was just going to, thank you Mayor. That's what I was going to point out is I think if we went back and looked at those issues of why we brought that up and we specifically identified neighborhoods. We don't have that many that are, you know agricultural transitional zones so if you look in areas of the city where you look at ultimately urbanizing, it does affect development patterns so there's not that many that are unique like this. Most of these other large lot neighborhoods are zoned, and have already been subdivided for large lots so this is a very unique and if you wanted to revisit that issue paper I think that might be something you might want to take up under a work session. Mayor Furlong: Right, right and going forward. I think to the extent that it is rather isolated is helpful. And I guess I will make just one comment and that's a note of thanks to our Planning Commission members. Having read through the minutes you could tell that there was some challenges that they had trying to come up with looking at something that, I'm reading into their comments, seemed very reasonable on the surface but it didn't fit the ordinance and we challenged them and appreciate the work that they do following the ordinance and I think that is the thing that we expect them to do and so I thank them for that so I don't want to see this action viewed as somehow not understanding what the Planning Commission members went through and their thoughtful recommendation as well. Mr. Laufenburger. Councilman Laufenburger: One more thought. If we were to grant a variance of 1,560 square feet, that means he could build up to that amount. He wouldn't have to build that full amount. He could build 2,000. He could build 1,000 if he wanted. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. That's correct. Councilman Laufenburger: In fact he could build 1,000 in this building and then he could build another accessory structure that would be no larger than 1,560. Am I saying that right Mr. Knutson? Roger Knutson: You're approving a specific building. Councilman Laufenburger: Oh, okay. So this building. Roger Knutson: Yes. Councilman Laufenburger: Is, okay. Kate Aanenson: Mayor I just want to circle back to one more point where you talked about, that issue paper. What we're talking about today is looking at a specific lot but part of that issue paper talked at kind of that nexus and what's that relationship between lot size and a maximum so that was the other rational basis to say you know let's understand what this is being used for. What should be that maximum and the circumstance you're looking at character it sits in the neighborhood which is appropriate for the variance process but you know I think that's the tipping point kind of saying well what makes sense for that neighborhood basis which is why they said a variance process when you could take that input from the neighbors and that process. Mayor Furlong: So what that is telling me is that the process here, while it may be onerous and time consuming it is a public process that does have benefits in terms of making sure that the neighbors know what's going on. We heard at the Planning Commission that they spoke in favor of it. That it gives staff, the Planning Commission and the council the opportunity to look at the neighborhood and make sure something different than just what's allowed by ordinance because if somebody wants to fit within ordinance they can just do it without public notice. Any public hearings. Any of the process. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. 21 Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 Mayor Furlong: So there is value from a, perhaps again I guess value might be the wrong word but there is a public purpose to what has gone on here. Mr. McDonald, and then we'll move on. Councilman McDonald: I guess Mr. Mayor, yeah. If I could just add. You know I kind of agree with what Ms. Aanenson said and everything. Again when I looked at this I did look at the neighborhood and it's like what's the norm within the neighborhood. If there had been no other out buildings on any of these lots, well I would have been probably against all of this because at that point I mean you're putting a 2,500 square foot out building in an area that is going to stand out but that's not what the applicant is doing so I think the process that we've got in place is fine and the Planning Commission did what they're supposed to do. They evaluated this based upon the ordinances and based upon what they could do and then sent it up to the Planning Commission with their findings and everything from which we can make a determination of do we accept their recommendation or not. So I like that part of the process and again as you said, we did put the neighborhood on notice. There was a public meeting. Everyone is aware of all of this. Again one of the questions I asked was, does anyone you know contest it or protest and the answer is no so it's very acceptable that something like this you know fits into the neighborhood so I like the process I guess and just getting to your point, do we need to relook at this. I would say probably not. As you pointed out, yeah if you want to stay within the ordinance go ahead and build up to 1,000 square feet but anything above that we probably do need to look at the neighborhood. Is that going to fit? Let's make sure that it is compliant within the area so I guess that's why I would just argue that maybe we don't need to look at anything. Mayor Furlong: And that's possible. I think the other advantages I mentioned too is that it allows conditions to be included if a variance is approved and those conditions can be helpful in terms of future property owners as well. Thank you. If there's no other comments I would certainly stand. Councilman McDonald: If I could 1 will do the motion. Mayor Furlong: Councilman McDonald. Councilman McDonald: I make a motion that the Chanhassen City Council approves Planning Case #2012-10 for a 1,560 foot accessory structure variance subject to conditions outlined in the staff report and adoption of the attached Planning Commission Findings of Fact. Mayor Furlong: Actually these are being revised tonight. Councilman McDonald: Okay. Roger Knutson: Revising the numbers. Councilman McDonald: Revising the numbers accordingly. Councilwoman Ernst: Second. Mayor Furlong: Motion's been made and seconded. Is there any future discussion? Hearing none we'll proceed with the vote. Councilman McDonald moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded that the Chanhassen City Council approves Planning Case #2012-10 for a 1,560 square foot accessory structure variance from the 1,000 square foot accessory structure limitation to allow for a 2,560 square foot accessory structure, 22 Chanhassen City Council — October 8, 2012 subject to the following conditions and adoption of the attached Planning Commission Findings of Fact, revising the numbers accordingly: 1. The accessory structure will require a building permit. 2. The accessory structure must comply with Minnesota State Building Code. 3. Outdoor storage must comply with City Code. 4. The accessory structure may not be used for the purpose of a home occupation as defined in the Chanhassen City Code. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. None CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None. Councilwoman Ernst moved, Councilwoman Tjornhom seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 23 The contents of this file have been scanned. Do not add anything to it unless it has been scanned. Meuwissen, Kim From: Jay Donohue [jay@rentspace.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 2:48 PM To: Meuwissen, Kim Cc: McGovern, Ashley; Generous, Bob Subject: RE: Variance Request Past Due Invoice Ok Thanks.................Jay Donohue From: Meuwissen, Kim[mailto:kmeuwissenCulci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 1:34 PM To: Jay Donohue Cc: McGovern, Ashley; Generous, Bob Subject: RE: Variance Request Past Due Invoice Mr. Donohue, Since my last email to you, I received a call from Ashley McGovern in our Finance Department and upon further research, she discovered that the $171.00 payment was included with your utility bill paid in July. The $171.00 was applied as a credit to your utility bill and has since been reduced by $114.74to pay for your August utility bill. Ashley will credit the $171.00 to the GIS invoice, which will leave an outstanding balance of $114.74 in your utility account. This amount will be included on your October utility bill; however, there will not be any late charge or penalty incurred on this amount. If you have any questions about this, please contact Ashley at 942-227-1144. Thanks for your patience and understanding! Kim NfEUIMSSEN *CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING SECRETARY 952-227-1 107 "-A1 LTO: h:MEUVViSSEN@Ci. C HA:N'HASSEN. MN. US T M, From: Jay Donohue rmailto:iay(&rentspace.coml Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 12:44 PM To: Meuwissen, Kim Subject: RE: Variance Request Past Due Invoice Kim We have a record that this invoice was paid on July 11th, please verify. Thanks, Jay Donohue From: Meuwissen, Kim rmailto:kmeuwissenCd)ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 11:16 AM SCANNED 1 To: iav@rentsi)ace.com Cc: Generous, Bob Subject: Variance Request Past Due Invoice Mr. Donohue, Attached to this email is a past due invoice in the amount of $171.00 for the property owners list that was required as a part of the application process for your variance request (see attached application). Please send a check in the amount of $171.00 payable to the City of Chanhassen at your earliest convenience. If you prefer to pay by credit card, please call me with the following information and I will be happy to process it: Card type Card number Expiration Date Billing address & zip code Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Kim MEUWISSEN *CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING SECRETARY 952-227-1 107 A,IAILTO: KMEUM9SSEN@CI.CHA:NHASSENI>IV. US ©Find us on Facebook �I r ,C:? OF CHANHASSEN P G BOX 147 C'".j ASSEN MN 55317 07/17/2012 1:29 PM 46-pipt No. 00193246 4FT K: AshleyM JAY/LAURIE DONOHUE TROENDLE CIRCLE MN 55317 __________________________________________ WA 64.45 $W� - SW 76.34 Water - SM 24.78 Wt'pl Test - WT 5.43 "total 171.00 =a{ 0.00 171.00 C',.iitae -------0.00 Meuwissen, Kim From: Meuwissen, Kim Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 1:34 PM To: 'Jay Donohue' Cc: McGovern, Ashley; Generous, Bob Subject: RE: Variance Request Past Due Invoice Mr. Donohue, Since my last email to you, I received a call from Ashley McGovern in our Finance Department and upon further research, she discovered that the $171.00 payment was included with your utility bill paid in July. The $171.00 was applied as a credit to your utility bill and has since been reduced by $114.74 to pay for your August utility bill. Ashley will credit the $171.00 to the GIS invoice, which will leave an outstanding balance of $114.74 in your utility account. This amount will be included on your October utility bill; however, there will not be any late charge or penalty incurred on this amount. If you have any questions about this, please contact Ashley at 942-227-1144. Thanks for your patience and understanding! Kim MEUWISSEN *CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING SECRETARY 952-227-1 107 M.41LTO:KMEUbYISSENOCI.CHANHASSEV. MN. U'S ©Find us on Facebook From: Jay Donohue [mailto:iayCcbrentspace.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 12:44 PM To: Meuwissen, Kim Subject: RE: Variance Request Past Due Invoice Kim We have a record that this invoice was paid on July 11th, please verify. Thanks, Jay Donohue From: Meuwissen, Kim[mailto:kmeuwissen@ci.chanhassen.mn.usl Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 11:16 AM To: iav@rentsoace.com Cc: Generous, Bob Subject: Variance Request Past Due Invoice Mr. Donohue, Attached to this email is a past due invoice in the amount of $171.00 for the property owners list that was required as a part of the application process for your variance request (see attached application). Please send a check in the amount of $171.00 payable to the City of Chanhassen at your earliest convenience. If you prefer to pay by credit card, please call me with the following information and I will be happy to process it: Card type Card number Expiration Date Billing address & zip code Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. KIM MELT WISSEN *CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING SECRETARY 952-227-1 1 o7 ,WAILTO: KMEUWISSEN@CI _CHANHASSEN. MN. US ©Find us on Facebook' City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 00F (952) 227-1100 MUSEN To: Jay Donohue 6561 Troendle Circle Chanhassen, MN 55317 Qu1 DATE June 7, 2012 Invoice zIlill),/ Re: 6561 Troendle Circle Variance Requ t Planning Case 2012-07 r upon receipt QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 57 Property Owners List within 500' of 6561 Troendle I abels) $3.00 $171.00 0 TOTAL DUE $171.00 NOTE: This invoice is i o`ddnce with the Development Review Application submitted to the City by the Addressee shown above (copy attache nd must be paid prior to the public hearing scheduled for June 19, 2012. Make all check I : City of Chanhassen Please write the fo ing code on your check: Planning Case #2012-07. If yo h questions concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. C' CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 FAX (952) 227-1110 TO: Campbell Knutson, PA 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Copy of letter LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE JOB NO. 6/26/12 2012-07 ATTENTION Carole Hoeft RE: Document Recording M Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Change Order ❑ Pay Request ❑ COPIES DATE No. DESCRIPTION 1 6119/12 12-07 Variance 2012-07 for 6561 Troendle Circle (Lot 4, Block 2, Troendle Addition THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ For your use ❑ As requested ❑ For review and comment ❑ FORBIDS DUE REMARKS ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Returned for corrections ® For Recording ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ Submit ❑ Return ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPY TO: Jay & Laurie Donohue, 6561 Troendle Circle SIGN copies for distribution corrected prints ;i Meuw sen, (952) 227-11 SCANNED If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA VARIANCE 2012-07 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants the following variance: A 6.9 percent variance from the 25 percent hard cover limitation to permit hard cover of 31.9 percent on property zoned Single Family Residential (RSF). 2. Property. The variance is for property located at 6561 Troendle Circle in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as Lot 4, Block 2, Troendle Addition. 3. Condition. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions: a. The owner shall remove the existing patio surface and stairs at the rear of the home and re -grade the site to maintain or improve existing drainage patterns. b. Building permits are required for the construction of the porch and deck. c. The structure must comply with Minnesota State Building Code. 4. Larse. If within one (1) year of the issuance of this variance the allowed construction has not been substantially completed, this variance shall lapse. ti Dated: June 19, 2012 (SEAL) STATE OF MWNESOTA (ss COUNTY OF CARVER CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: 71 L 01� Thomas A. Furlong, Mwj AND: �A Todd Gerhardt, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this,2May of 2012 by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor and Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the - of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to authority granted by its City Council. City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 IIIIIIIIr :Q— Q KARENJ.ENGELHARDTNotary Public-Minnesota�,�, �pn,n�y.pn E>plren Jan 31, p15 la -off June 26, 2012 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Jay & Laurie Donohue 6561 Tmendle Circle 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Planning Case #2012-07 Hard Surface Coverage Variance Administration Phone:952.227.1100 Dear Jay & Laurie: Fax:952.2271110 Building Inspections This letter is to confirm that on June 19, 2012, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments Phone:952.227.1180 approved a 6.9 percent variance to permit hard cover of 31.9 percent on property Fax:952.227,1190 zoned Single Family Residential (RSF) for the construction of a screen porch on your property subject to the following conditions: Engineering Phone:952.227.1160 1. The owner shall remove the existing patio surface and stairs at the rear of the Fax:952.227.1170 home and re -grade the site to maintain or improve existing drainage patterns. Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 2. Building permits are required for the construction of the porch and deck. Fax:952.227.1110 3. The structure must comply with Minnesota State Building Code. Park E Recreation Phone:952.227.1120 If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (952) Fax:952.227.1110 227-1131 orb enerous ,ci.chanhassen mn us. Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Sincerely. PFax:952.227.14040 Fax: 952.2271404 Planning & Robert Generous, AICP Natural Resources Phone:952.227.1130 Senior Planner Fax: 952.227.1110 ec: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Public Works Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director 7901 Park Place Terry Jeffery, Water Resources Coordinator Phone:952.227.1300 Ashley Mellgren, Planning Intern Fax: 952.227.1310 Jerry Mohn, Building Official Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 g.\plan\2012 planning cases\2012-07 6561 iroendle circle variance\approval letter.doc Fax: 952.227-1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us SCANNED Chanhassen is a Community for Lite -Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow I.)--6-7 Chanhassen Planning Commission —June 19, 2012 Colopoulos: I'll make that motion to the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation, development review application and racks schematic Section 20-266 of the Chanhassen City Code and public hearing notice. Aller: Can I have a second to that for motion for amendment. Thomas: Yeah, motion to amend Colopoulos moved, Thomas seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit 2006-26 amendment to permit the construction of up to four non - motorized watercraft racks at the Lakeside recreational beachlot subject to the existing conditions of approval and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. Aller: Passes formally. PUBLIC HEARING: 6561 TROENDLE CIRCLE: REOUEST FOR A HARD SURFACE COVERAGE VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A SCREEN PORCH ON PROPERTY ZONED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY (RSF) LOCATED AT 6561 TROENDLE CIRCLE. APPLICANT: JAY DONOHUE, PLANNING CASE 2012-07. Generous: Thank you Chairman Aller and commissioners. As you stated this is a variance request for hard surface coverage on the property zoned single family residential. Planning Case 2012-07. The Planning Commission is sitting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments in reviewing this item. The property is located at 6561 Troendle Circle. This is in north central Chanhassen. Just to the east and south of this is the Carver Beach area of Chanhassen and approximately a quarter mile north is Pleasant View Road. It's currently these areas aren't connected yet to come back out to Powers to get to them. Single family homes in this neighborhood developed in the early 90's. The request is for a 6.9 percent variance to permit hard cover of 31.9% on property zoned single family residential. Our normal standard for single family homes is 25%. When this, the applicant, or not the applicant. The original homeowner came in or the original builder came in, the first approval actually allowed a house and driveway that exceeded the 25%. However at that time we did not catch the coverage because it wasn't included on the survey. Since then the City has changed it's review processes and for any improvements now we get those calculations so that we don't end up in situations like this. The existing hard cover on the site is 32.7%. What the applicant is proposing is to put his porch and deck in the rear of the house over where the existing patio is, which is hard surface and that was put in by the previous property owner. With the proposed, even with the proposed expansion the applicant is looking at reducing the hard cover on the site by 117 square feet, which is just under I % hard cover for the property. The reduction in the hard cover includes the construction of the porch so that was a pretty good. It makes the situation better from what's existing. He can keep what he has now and so we actually will improve it. And we believe that the granting of the variance is in keeping with the intent of the ordinance. We allow people to have porches on their property. It is a reasonable use and it's normally associated with a single family home. And the practical difficulty in this situation is that he bought the house and it's already over and he wanted to do a reasonable improvement and he's not permitted to. Had this been a simple non -conforming site and built before 1972 the assumption would be that it complied with ordinance and any reduction is appropriate and the staff could have signed off on that administratively. However since this was built since that 1972, our ordinances have been in place and so his only relief is to request a variance from the hard cover. Staff is recommending approval of the variance application to permit 31.9% hard cover on this property and allow him to construct his screen porch. With that, and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Decision. With that I'd be happy to answer any questions. SCANNED Chanhassen Planning Commission — June 19, 2012 Aller. Any questions? No? No question. t think it was a great report and I understand. I think everything that had occurred. Would the applicant like to come forward? Is it Jay or Laurie Donohue? Jay Donohue: My name's Jay Donohue. I live at 6561 Troendle Circle in Chan here and my ultimate proposal here is actually reducing my hard cover I currently have when I purchased the house. It was kind of a fast learning curve for me once I applied for the, to build this porch and the whole idea right from the beginning to remove the stone patio that's back there and put in a porch. When we applied for a permit we were turned down obviously and I've had several meetings with Bob and also Bob hooked up me with Terry Jeffery of the Water Resource Manager and after meeting with him and he felt it was a reasonable request on my part. After the meeting with him I decided to go ahead and try to get a variance to do this. The house was actually built at 29.9% hard cover, which is considerably over what the City of Chanhassen, so I went ahead to see if I could reduce the current hard cover and put up a you know more usable screen porch. Aller: It looks like the screen porch is actually a better use than the patio so. Jay Donohue: Yeah, well after sitting out last night. Aller: That's a good betterment. Jay Donohue: We tried to sit outlast night and we were just hoping we'd get a variance because of the bugs. Aller: Yeah, you might need heavy duty screens. And a reduction is much appreciated. I mean we're al looking to try to make Chanhassen a little bit better and one of the ways we do that is to make sure we keep our hard cover, hard surfaces down as much as possible so you're asking for a reduction from something that you've already got and it looks like you're improving the property and it certainly was of no fault or consequence of your's at the time that you purchased the property so it's unique to the property. So thank you for coming and making the presentation. Jay Donohue: Sure, thank you. Aller: Any questions? I'll entertain a motion. Aanenson: Oh, Mr. Chair can we just. Aller: Oh, let me open the public hearing. If anyone wishes to speak on the request for a variance at 6561 Troendle please step forward. Seeing no one stepping forward, close the public hearing. Don't think there's any need for comment. Questions. Colopoulos: I've got one question regarding procedure Mr. Chair. This is a variance is subject to our approval correct? This is not a recommendation we're making. Aller: Correct. Colopoulos: Okay. Aanenson: Subject to you have to have a certain percentage otherwise it would be appealed. Yeah, somebody could appeal it. If the majority votes in favor of it it would stop here unless somebody appealed it, correct. 4 Chanhassen Planning Commission — June 19, 2012 Aller: And that appeal should be done in 4 days for those who are listening. So with that, would anybody like to make a motion? Colopoulos: In that case I will make a motion that the Planning Commission approve the hard cover variance subject to the following conditions and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Decision. l . The owner shall remove the existing patio surface and stairs at the rear of the home and re -grade the site to maintain or improve existing drainage patterns. 2. Building permits are required for the construction of the porch and deck. 3. The structure must comply with Minnesota State Building Code. And I'll also reference in the motion the attachments listed 1 through I 1 on page 3 of section 3. Aller: Having a motion, do we have a second? Hokkanen: Second. Thomas: Second. Let Lisa have it. Alley: Any discussion? Colopoulos moved, Hokkanen seconded that the Planning Commission, as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, approves Planning Case #2012-07 for a 6.9 percent variance to permit hard cover of 31.9 percent on property zoned Single Family Residential (RSF) subject to the following conditions and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Decision: l . The owner shall remove the existing patio surface and stairs at the rear of the home and re -grade the site to maintain or improve existing drainage patterns. 2. Building permits are required for the construction of the porch and deck 3. The structure must comply with Minnesota State Building Code. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: RESIDENTIAL. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD-R) AMENDMENTS: REQUEST TO AMEND THE FOLLOWING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS: A. MEADOWS/WOODS AT LONGACRES. B. MINNEWASHTA CREEK. C. RED CEDAR COVE. Aller: Is it set 4? Generous: It's group 4, yes it is. We're on the downhill slope on these things. We actually have the research done for 6 groups so we're moving forward and this Thursday we're having a neighborhood meeting. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION IN RE: Application of Jay & Laurie Donohue for a hardcover variance to construct a screen porch on property zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF) — Planning Case #2012-07. On January 3, 2012, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF). 2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density use. 3. The legal description of the property is as follows: Lot 4, Block 2, Troendle Addition 4. Variance Findines — Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the granting of a variance: a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Finding: The granting of the variance is in keeping with the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance. The construction of a porch is a normal use associated with a single- family home. b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Finding: The practical difficulty with the construction of a porch is that the initial approval of the home as well as later improvements exceed the city code requirements. The owner is proposing to remove the patio and construct a porch which will reduce the SCANNED total hardcover. This reduction will result in an improved condition compared to what existed when the current owner purchased the property. c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The purpose of the variance is not based upon economic considerations, but is to permit the owner to enjoy the property in a reasonable manner. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: The owner purchased a property which already exceeded the total allowed hardcover by 4.9% as a result of the home alone. In addition, the previous owner had installed a patio which brought the total hardcover to 32.7%. The owner is proposing to remove the patio and construct a porch which will reduce the total hardcover. This reduction will result in an improved condition compared to what existed when the current owner purchased the property. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The construction of a porch is a normal use associated with a single-family home and would be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. f. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter. Finding: This does not apply to this request. 5. The planning report #2012-07, dated June 19, 2012, prepared by Robert Generous, et al., is incorporated herein. DECISION "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves Planning Case #2012-07 for a 6.9 percent variance to permit hard cover of 31.9 percent to construct a screen porch on property zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF)." 2012. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments this 19'" day of June, CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: Chairman PROPOSED MOTION: "The Chanhassen Planning Commission, as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, approves Planning Case #2012-07 for a 6.9 percent variance to permit hard cover of 31.9 percent on property zoned Single Family Residential (RSF) subject to the conditions of approval, and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Decision. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The owner is requesting a hardcover variance to allow the construction of a screen porch. LOCATION: 6561 Troendle Circle (Lot 4, Block 2, Troendle Addition) APPLICANT: Jay & Laurie Donohue 6561 Troendle Circle Chanhassen, MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: Single -Family Residential (RSF) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density ACREAGE: 0.35 acres (15,323 sq. ft.) DENSITY: NA 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 m the Zoning Ordinance for variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because of the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that they meet the standards in the ordinance. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a hard cover variance to allow construction of a screened porch on the back of his home. The applicant is not the original owner of the property. The existing home was constructed in 1994. At the time of the building permit issuance, the plan had a hard cover of approximately 29.9 percent. At that time, the city did not require that the hand cover calculations be included on the plans. The applicant is proposing to reduce the amount of hard cover on the property by 117 square feet (0.8 percent) even with the construction of the porch. SCANNED Planning Commission 6561 Troendle Circle Variance Request — Planning Case 2012-07 June 19, 2012 Page 2 of 3 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Division 3, Variances. Chapter 20, Article XII, "RSF" Single -Family Residential District, section 20-615, Lot requirements and setbacks BACKGROUND A building permit was issued in 1994 for the construction of the house. Since then, the previous owner installed a patio at the rear of the house. The city does not have any records of the patio installation. Prior to May 2004, the City did not require permits for such improvements. On August 8, 1991, the City approved the final plat for Troendle Addition creating 12 lots for single-family homes. ANALYSIS In non-confornng situations, Section 20-72 (d) of the ordinance states that: "Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, any detached single-family dwelling that is on a non- conforming lot or that is a non -conforming use or structure may be altered, or expanded provided, however, that the non -conformity may not be increased. If a setback of a dwelling is non -conforming, no additions may be added to the non -conforming side of the building unless the addition meets setback requirements." Since the home and improvements were never conforming, the non -conforming status does not apply. Their only relief is through the variance process. As part of staff s review, we believe that the principle of reducing the amount of non- conformity is appropriate and reasonable. The applicant purchased a property which already exceeded the total allowed hardcover by 4.91/0 as a result of the home alone. In addition, the previous owner had installed a patio which brought the total hardcover to 32.7%. The applicant is proposing to remove the patio and construct a porch which will reduce the total hardcover. This reduction will result in an improved condition compared to what existed when the current owner purchased the property. A review of the resident concerns' database does not indicate any anomalous drainage issues or storm sewer capacity issues in the vicinity. Because the applicant is proposing to improve conditions that were created prior to his taking ownership of the property, staff recommends approval of the requested variance. Additional comments may be forthcoming on the building permit plan depending upon the outcome of the variance request. A building permit is required for the construction of a screen porch. The structure must comply with Minnesota State Building Code. A variance may be granted if all of the following criteria are met: Planning Commission 6561 Troendle Circle Variance Request — Planning Case 2012-07 June19,2012 Page 3 of 3 (1) Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. (2) When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. (3) That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. (4) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. (5) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. (6) Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as defined in M.S. § 216C.06, subd. 14, when in harmony with this chapter. Staff finds that in this instance these criteria have been met. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the hard cover variance subject to the following conditions and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and Decision: The owner shall remove the existing patio surface and stairs at the rear of the home and re - grade the site to maintain or improve existing drainage patterns. 2. Building permits are required for the construction of the porch and deck. 3. The structure must comply with Minnesota State Building Code. 1. Findings of Fact and Decision 2. Development Review Application 3. Narrative by Jay Donohue 4. Existing and Proposed Hardcover 5. Reduced Copy Existing Site Survey 6. Picture of Patio Area 7. Reduced Copy Porch and Deck Elevations 8. Reduced Copy Porch and Deck Floor Plan 9. Reduced Copy Foundation Plan 10. Building Permit Survey Dated 6-17-94 11. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List giplan\2012 plmming ca \2012-07 6561 troendle circle verim cc\staff report.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION IN RE: Application of Jay & Laurie Donohue for a hardcover variance to construct a screen porch on property zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF) — Planning Case #2012-07. On January 3, 2012, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF). 2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density use. 3. The legal description of the property is as follows: Lot 4, Block 2, Tmendle Addition 4. Variance Findings — Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the granting of a variance: a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Finding: The granting of the variance is in keeping with the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance. The construction of a porch is a normal use associated with a single- family home. b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. 'Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Finding: The practical difficulty with the construction of a porch is that the initial approval of the home as well as later improvements exceed the city code requirements. The owner is proposing to remove the patio and construct a porch which will reduce the total hardcover. This reduction will result in an improved condition compared to what existed when the current owner purchased the property. c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The purpose of the variance is not based upon economic considerations, but is to permit the owner to enjoy the property in a reasonable manner. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: The owner purchased a property which already exceeded the total allowed hardcover by 4.9% as a result of the home alone. In addition, the previous owner had installed a patio which brought the total hardcover to 32.7%. The owner is proposing to remove the patio and construct a porch which will reduce the total hardcover. This reduction will result in an improved condition compared to what existed when the current owner purchased the property. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The construction of a porch is a normal use associated with a single-family home and would be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. f. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter. Finding: This does not apply to this request. 5. The planning report 42012-07, dated June 19, 2012, prepared by Robert Generous, et al., is incorporated herein. DECISION "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves Planning Case #2012-07 for a 6.9 percent variance to permit hard cover of 31.9 percent to construct a screen porch on property zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF)." i111VA ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments this 19t' day of June, CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: Chairman 2 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard — P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 — (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Applicant Name. and Address: Contact: Phone%lQt- 3,P5-cs/9/ Fax: Email: ,o_a irrvtsrx�C . ror, Planning Case No. U 3 -(�cY7 CITY OF CHANHASSEN Ch RECEIVED MAY '1 g 7012 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT Property Owner Name and Address: t- 4U16P 1 tesnnO ul_ 65�i TrRr.,dlr C;.cle Cl�g�.l�vas�e�l Mat C5317 Contact: Phone:-32.540141 Fax Email: eau P r"Fsoncc ' rpr-' 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) (Additional recording fees may apply) Variance (VAR) Wetland Alteration Permit (WAR) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign - $200 (City to install and remove) X E for Filing Fees/ o ney Cost' $50 P/SPR/VA L_ AP/Metes & Bounds - $450 Minor SUB TOTAL FEE $ - iU C-{14'L. SG� 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. 'Five (5) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8'/2" 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: �ritlhUe1 �Gheflt�+ iOt;C h 1 LOCATION: %�C, � Tr0lh��� C',r c-Itt- C4av r�WSCfA1 SSA ( � LEGAL DESCRIPTION ANDPID: i--Ot 1.1 aloc V- 2 . ivory A)P AdAiii'an Z 58��U5d TOTAL ACREAGE: 15 3 Z� WETLANDS PRESENT: YES X NO n PRESENT ZONING: _ f� :�; F REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: R0.r C COV e r /dr° 11 QY� C e r tc, u est -k, LtiY1S1YUC�- �Y 1�PP n .�"i('Gf A FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW: Include number of existing employees: and new employees: 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 Owner's 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 be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. C-- Signature Signature g:\plan\fans\developm t review applimtim.dw 5-17-1z Date Date SCANNED PROJECT NAME: bonohu LOCATION: (":--6 to I T LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PID:_ -0t qi 2 ! (Vory lP iiaAii ,an * Z 58(n'iio(l5Q TOTALACREAGE:_- WETLANDS PRESENT: PRESENT ZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: YES X NO REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: 6 r FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW: Include number of existing employees: and new employees: 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 be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. A 5-/7-11 Date -�5-1-7-IZ Date g''plan\fwms\dn 10PM1t review appfiwia dm SCANNED Jay & Laurie Donohue Screen Porch project 6561 Troendle Circle, Chanhassen MN 55317 Purchased property November of 2009 There were a number of factors that lead to the purchase of the above home, and one of those was a perfect setting for building a screen porch. Unfortunately, we did not know at the time of purchase that the property was encumbered by the fact that the builder was allowed to exceed the hard cover allowance rules set by the city of Chanhassen. This was brought to our attention after we had a screen porch designed, bid, a contractor hired, and applied for a permit. Much to our surprise, and to the surprise of our contractor, the permit application was refused after the city planners searched the property records and found the hard cover percentage looked to exceed the City limit of 25%. At that time we were told a survey would be required to properly set the percentage of hard cover. The survey did show the area of our lot is at 15,323 S.F. It also showed that when the house was built in 1991 the finished product was 4,574sf, which was 4.9% over the amount of allowable hard cover at the time of construction; therefore, before anyone had occupied the house, it was encumbered with a hard cover violation. I think it's fair to assume that anyone purchasing this house would be unaware of the encumbrance that is attached to it, and I also think that it is fair to assume that anyone living in this house would want to use the area in the backyard, just off the kitchen, as a place to enjoy the outdoors. At some point, after the house was built, one of the owners did take advantage of this area and had a very nice stone patio installed with a stone stairway accessing the lower backyard. The addition of the stone patio and stairs has added 437 more SF to the hard cover of this property giving it a total of 5,011 SF and a percentage of 32.7 hard cover. As it stands, we purchased a home that has a 32.7% hard cover in a city that allows 25%. The original residence when built, occupied 29.9%, and a previous owner's stone patio occupies 2.8%. Let's face it; due to the hard cover encumbrance that came with the property, we really have nothing to work with except what is currently there. We don't feel that it is beyond reason to ask that we be allowed to use that area more efficiently. We would like to remove the stone patio and replace it with a smaller screen porch .The screen porch will be 117sf smaller and will add up to a reduction of hard cover of 0.8%. We have carefully searched our property to see if any other hardcover could be removed to lower our percentage and there is not 1 square foot that could be removed that is not essential to the residence. Jay Donohue EXISTING HARDcoVER DWELLING CONCRETE DRIVEWAY STONE PATIO TOTAL HARDCOVER AREA OF LOT % HARDCOVER 29771 SQ. FT. 306 SQ. FT. I A97 SQ. FT. 437 SQ. FT. 55011 SQ. FT. 15,323 SQ. FT. 32.7% PROPOSEDO IIARIICOVER DWELLING 2,771 SQ. FT. CONCRETE 306 SQ. FT. DRIVEWAY L497 SQ. FT. PROPOSED PORCH 320 SQ. FT. TOTAL HARDCOVER AREA OF LOT 404 SQ. FT. 15X3 SQ. FT. % HARDCOVER 31.9% Asfozl *O/v ;oro p a 01 U A 31vos jIHdVHo IYYAO7oww ONIJSI" agia)OYFAr 67SWOAV 9..YAA.AAA.YiIti.PNP�I .�IAAPAM#�AMAMm l/I rrU y. s rta 1�MA V Al # M. rp V .AI A W .AAR( Aq d.��IPAr��Ps(rr/AAA/AT AOLgrr �.0.11w T. PPw��nr•wr +ow�r��A.�Ar.�ti.nw�i Arm V=M�tiAeAt i rT.gAnl'i.r R wPrr sP7�pprPdw •s�Awrl.'��)�raIAAAW.AA+A�� �v�a(AM.IM! / 1i �IrIAAAAP�r.[wA AwAli R.Yr rP��4 /AI.°•�r14��r1r�'1 u+..r�per n 'as YW�PA.A.!• LIR�P Y— HaBOA(OQ XVf 96iS Awd rrwrA■s wwws Aw nvao AA AQ i 9NIENEW JDWAW OW, nr�H " Jul I :SL' JASON JM CUSTOM DESIGNS 7T7 �b ORNE LL/4V6QLY, HN 35390 anr.o s+, C$L. (76l193YJ39 HOME (7f31 bib('Kd NOTE... ALL DIMENSIONING IS TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE SHEATHING i OIINDATION PLAN PLAT OF SURVEY FOR; MICHAEL HOMES LOT 4, BLOCK 2, TROENDLE ADD., CARVER COUNTY (1019.5) N 00'06'52" W 144.00 019.5 N - - � _ n - - (lmzs) rolzs n A `- DRAINAGE & U41 `ITY/;, a EASEMENT `1p1) 1020 _ 76.08— _ _TOP OF IRON (1021.44) r------1'3 � _21-17 1021.8) /1017.48) OF' IRON PROPOSED HOUSE GARAGE EXISTING HOUSE n 2r 8 L925 n 1022-5) x L(1021.9) 25.29 S 00*22'16" E (1025.0) EX. S `00 k' GAR. (1025.21 _} tj. (1024. p � ^N �� h loza.s ,@,=�73'21'35 ucHT�oza.$) R=60.0 1023.21) �- L 6.82 C' CURB R,120.0016" L = 19.4 G\�C� (1023.51) x(1027.11) I ,ROE BENCHMARK: TOP OF NUT HYDRANT AT LOT 6 8 LOT 7, BLOCK 2 ELEV. 1026.64 1---.7'n314a11 i)1d T Eresr.... Go+tw/ tb_ aNY� LEGEND O Iron monuments ( )existing elevations I� proposed eI.vutl.n. � directlon of proposed surface drainage o set wood stake 1.7b'7 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS 1017.21owest floor .1025.0 garage floor 1026.1 top of foandation PROW® ER08101 Nota: Only copies whits bear an emboseed sed are certtthd cep le i Hansen Thorp 1 hereby catty that survey was prepared by me or under my No. sun..end that am a duly registered land surveyor under 94— 066 Pellinen Olson Inc. Minnesot. I ta smmt. Sea6on 326.02 to 326.16. 8aok-Page Civil &Survey Engineers 7565 Office Ridge Circle 94 -38 Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3644 M ,/ Scow (612) 829-0700 Date: �/r -�T RagisNailan No. )g¢Zs 1 "=30' CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on June 7, 2012, 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 6561 Troendle Circle Variance Request — Planning Case 2012-07 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�l' nk' 12012. Notary Pub] Publi KIM T. MEUWISSEN Notary Public -Minnesota My Cmimission Expires Jan 31, 2015 Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of the agenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for hard surface coverage variance to allow Proposal: construction of a screen porch on property zoned Residential Single Family RSF A licant: Jay Donohue Property 6561 Troendle Circle 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/2012-07. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob Generous by Questions & email at boenerous(rDci.chanhassen.mmus or by phone at Comments: 952-227-1131. 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. 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 commercial/industrial. • Minnesota Stale Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant i 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. Date & Time: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start ' until later in the evening, depending on the order of the agenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for hard surface coverage variance to allow Proposal: construction of a screen porch on property zoned Residential Single Family RSF Applicant Jay Donohue Property 6561 Troendle Circle 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/2012-07. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob Generous by Questions & email at bgenerous(fti.chanhassen.mmus or by phone at 952-227-1131. If you choose to submit written comments, it is Comments: 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 commercial/industrial. • 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 j 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. BEDDOR ENTERPRISES LP BRADLEY & KAROL M JOHNSON BRYCE E FIER PO BOX 489 1001 LAKE LUCY RD 1040 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-0489 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8678 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8677 CHRISTOPHER T KOSVIC 960 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8679 DANIEL T & PAMELA D O'CONNOR 941 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8680 DONALD R & CANDACE L DECOSSE 860 VINELAND CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9335 EDWARD & PAMELA A CAPPELLE 6560 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9332 GRANT YOUNG 6495 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9349 HAYLEY A KERR 990 WESTERN DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9556 JAMES P & SUSAN M DUCHENE 961 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8680 JEFFREY N KIFFIN 6520 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9332 CLAUS M CANELL 6531 TROENDLE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9345 DAVID H & MAREN K REEDER 6501 TROENDLE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9345 DONALD W & CAROL M ZALUSKY 960 WESTERN DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9556 ERIC C HOPP 6581 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9334 GREGORY & BARBARA J PEPPERSACK 940 WESTERN DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9556 HUGH J & INGRID U ROBERTS 6561 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9334 JANET N & JAMES L RICE 900 VINELAND CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9335 JEROME M & THERESE M MEYER 1060 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8677 DANIEL J & JANET L SYVERSON 921 VINELAND CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9336 DIRK KOENIG 920 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8679 DOUGLAS M & DARLENE K OLSEN 901 VINELAND CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9336 ERIC R & KATHLEEN M ANDERSON 6580 TROENDLE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9344 GREGORY E & PATRICIA A ADAMS 6520 TROENDLE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9344 JAMES E GALAROWICZ 880 VINELAND CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9335 JAY B DONOHUE 6561 TROENDLE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9345 JOHN D BIRD 6540 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9332 JOHN H & BARBARA D HANSEN JOHN MICHAEL NORTON JOSEPH CALDWELL 6511 NEZ PERCE DR 6500 TROENDLE CIR 6590 TROENDLE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9333 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9344 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9344 JULIA A O'BRIEN MARY F MEUWISSEN MICHAEL J SHOBERG 6661 NEZ PERCE DR 4265 COUNTY ROAD 123 834 LONE EAGLE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9551 MAYER MN 55360-9631 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9417 MICHAEL P & CYNTHIA K LESAGE 6560 TROENDLE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9344 PAMELA E LIBBY 6501 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9333 REBECCA K HADRYS 1020 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8677 ROBERT H & PATTI A MANNING 940 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8679 STEPHEN A TORNIO 1021 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8678 STEVEN & GLORIA RAY 920 WESTERN DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9556 THOMAS J & ANNE L TEGEN 6641 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9551 US BANK NA AS TRUSTEE 1675 PALM BEACH LAKES BLVD STE WEST PALM BEACH FL 33401-2122 ZANE CASEY CAMPBELL DETERT 6500 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9332 NICOLETTE R RANDALL 6680 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9564 PHILIP G & LEEANNE LARSEN 6493 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9349 RICHARD G & DENISE C CLARKE 1000 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8677 ROBERT I III & TERESA DRAKE 980 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8679 STEPHEN M & DENISE M NORTON 6581 TROENDLE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9345 STEVEN C & JODIE L GRADY 6540 TROENDLE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9344 TODD J & TERESA JO OWENS 6535 PEACEFUL LN CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9510 VITO & MELANIE QUAGLIA 881 VINELAND CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9336 NICOLETTE RANDALL 6680 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9564 RANDY & JANET BAUERNFEIND 6481 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9349 ROBERT B PATTERSON JR 6580 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9332 ROBERT J KAHLMEYER 921 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8680 STEPHEN T KUEPPERS 6541 TROENDLE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9345 THOMAS & FOTINI DONNELLY 6491 NEZ PERCE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9349 TODD MICHAEL & GAYLE A LANTTO 981 LAKE LUCY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8680 WILLIAM B & ELIZABETH MANNING 861 VINELAND CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9336 Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of the agenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for hard surface coverage variance to allow Proposal: construction of a screen porch on property zoned Residential Single Family RSF Applicant: Jay Donohue Property 6561 Troendle Circle 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 inpdt 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. 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/2012-07. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob Generous by Questions & email at bgenerous(ccdci.chanhassen.mn.us or by phone at Comments: 952-227-1131. 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. 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 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 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 cityoften developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested persoms). • 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. SCANNED This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be d as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in van city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, 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 free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the user's access or use of data provided. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 049J82036654 'o $ 00.450 m 06/07/2012 c Mailed From 55317 US POSTAGE 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us 334 NFE 1 C11F 00 06/12/12 RETURN TO SENDER US BANK MOVED LEFT NO ADDRESS UNABLE TO FORWARD RETURN TO SENDER BC: 55117014747 *0478-00474-07-38 IJIIt1111n11111111JILt11111111111111111L1t1111111n111111111 . US BANK NA AS TRUSTEE 1675 PALM BEACH LAKES BLV 6 STE WEST PALM BEACH FL 33401-2122 SCANNED Inllnrlluln lllunnlinirlurllnlrlulrllrinlrinrlull Affidavit of Publication Southwest Newspapers CITY OF CHANHASSEN cARVCOUNTIES I SVEPIN State of Minnesota) N OOU NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING )SS. PLANNING CASE NO. 2012-07 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVFid County of Carver ) that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, June 19, 2012. at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chan: hers in Chanhassen City Hall. Laurie A. Hartmann, being duly swom, on oath says that she is the publisher or the authorized 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose agent of the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Vil- of this hearing is to consider a lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: request for a Variance to constrict a screen porch on property zoned Residential Single Family (RSF) (A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal and located atyD eCircle. newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as Applicant: Jay D onnohue.ohue. mended. ended. A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public / (B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No. .0 review on the City's web site at was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said www.ci.chanbassen.mn.us/20124N Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of or at City Hall during regular bust ness hours. All interested person the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both are invited to attend this public inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition hearing and express their opinio: is anp d publication of the Notice: with respect to this proposal. Robert Generous, Senior Planner abcdefghijkhanopgrstuvwxyz Email: bgenerons(a�ci.chanhmnus mn.us Phone: 952-227-1131 (Published in the Chanhassen Y Villager on Thursday, June 7, 2012; `J Laurie A. Hartmann No. 4639) Subscribed and sworn before me on � 1 '1� this ! day of 2012 JYMME JEANNEUE BARK NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 01/31/13 RATE INFORMATION Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space.... $31.20 per column inch Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ................................. $31.20 per column inch Rate actually charged for the above matter ............................................... $12.59 per column inch SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO.2012-07 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, June 19, 2012, 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 Variance to construct a screen porch on property zoned Residential Single Family (RSF) and located at 6561 Troendle Circle. Applicant: Jay Donohue. 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/2012-07 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. Robert Generous, Senior Planner Email: bgenerousgci chanhassen.mn.us Phone: 952-227-1131 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on June 7, 2012) SCANNED City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 Date: May 23, 2012 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department Review Response Deadline: June 8, 2012 By: Robert Generous, AICP, Senior Planner 952-227-1131 or bgenerous(a)ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Donohue Variance: Request for hardcover variance to allow construction of a screen porch on property zoned Residential Single Family (RSF) located at 6561 Troendle Circle (Lot 4, Block 2, Troendle Addition). Applicant/Owner: Jay & Laurie Donohue Planning Case: 2012-07 PID: 25-8690050 The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on May 18, 2012. The 60-day review period ends July 17, 2012. In order for us to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission and City Council review, we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on traffic circulation, existing and proposed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need for acquiring public lands or easements for park sites, street extensions or improvements, and utilities. Where specific needs or problems exist, we would like to have a written report to this effect from the agency concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on June 19, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than June 8, 2012. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. 1. City Departments: a. City Engineer b. City Attorney c. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official E Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 3. MN Dept. of Transportation 4. MN Dept. of Natural Resources 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 6. U.S. Fish & Wildlife 7. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services 8. Watershed District Engineer a. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek b. Lower Minnesota River c. Minnehaha Creek 9. Telephone Company (CenturyLink) 10. Electric Company (MN Valley) 11. Mediacom 12. CenterPoint Energy/Minnegasco SCANNED LOCATION MAP 6561 Troendle Circle Variance Request Planning Case 2012-07 F SUBJECT r PROPERTY T i 5 w 1' jX a K it .*1 Memorandum TO: Bob Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Terry Jeffery, Water Resources Coordinator DATE: June 6, 2012 RE: Donohue Variance: 6561 Troendle Circle I have reviewed the application for a variance from the hard cover requirements submitted by Mr. Jay Donohue. The applicant purchased a property which already exceeded the total allowed hardcover by 4.9% as a result of the home alone. In addition, the previous owner had installed a patio which brought the total hardcover to 32.7%. The applicant is proposing to remove the patio and construct a porch which will reduce the total hardcover. This reduction will result in an improved condition compared to what existed when the current owner purchased the property. A review to the resident concerns database does not indicate any anomalous drainage issues or storm sewer capacity issues in the vicinity. Because the applicant is proposing to improve conditions that were created prior to his taking ownership of the property, I would recommend approval of the requested variance. This concludes my review of the variance request. Additional comments may be forthcoming on the site plan depending upon the outcome of the variance request. SCANNED MEMORANDUM TO: Robert Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Jerritt Mohn, Building Official DATE: May 23, 2012 SUBJ: Request for hardcover variance to allow construction of a screen porch on property zoned Residential Single Family (RSF) located at 6561 Troendle Circle (Lot 4, Block 2, Troendle Addition). Planning Case: 2012-07 I have reviewed the request for the above variance and have the following comments: 1) Building Permit required. 2) Structure must comply with Minnesota State Building Code. GAPLAN\2012 Planning Cases\2012-07 6561 Trcendle Circle Variance\buildingofficialcomments.doc -�\PJAt-C CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard — P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 — (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Applicant Contact: Phone%l,'� - 3,;k5-(5/9/ Fax: Email: ^� "VhtapncP cnrti Planning Case No. 3 - 0� 7 CITY OF C IVED ANHASSEN CLJ MAY 1 0 2012 CMANHASSEN PLANNING DEFT Property Owner Name and Address: —�65� 1 Trn�r �11r Ct�.c�e Ct�ay.)nya��rn, Mlv C5317 Contact: Phone:(b62-32.5-o/91 Fax: Email: eo,4 6� re-,fs'xicc . rn,-. 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) (Additional recording fees may apply) Variance (VAR) Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign - $200 (City to install and remove) X E ow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" $50yUP/SPR/VAC�VAg0AP/Metes & Bounds - $;& Minor SUB c' TOTAL FEE $ 4- K7 C i'2jr 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. 'Five (5) 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 cony 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. PROJECT NAME: !)Onou e` SC MtF KI i (Z ZC h 11 LOCATION. (C6(.1 TV0<"1e CIr ck C-V'ov'r� gCCtA) SS� 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION ANDPID: (--Ot 9r �loc 2.1 (vorvAle, i'4aAii ,eY1 # zSS�Q�USQ TOTALACREAGE: WETLANDS PRESENT: /� YES _� NO PRESENT ZONING: f. S F REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: liana C.6yt r vo c:l aye e e Y tG' U e5t Wiz, FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW: Include number of existing employees: — and new employees: _ 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 1 am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make 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 be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and cored to the best of my knowledge. i— 5-17-Iz of I Date Signature g',plan\forms\development review applicationAm -5-17- 12- Date Jay & Laurie Donohue Screen Porch project 6561 Troendle Circle, Chanhassen MN 55317 Purchased property November of 2009 There were a number of factors that lead to the purchase of the above home, and one of those was a perfect setting for building a screen porch. Unfortunately, we did not know at the time of purchase that the property was encumbered by the fact that the builder was allowed to exceed the hard cover allowance rules set by the city of Chanhassen. This was brought to our attention after we had a screen porch designed, bid, a contractor hired, and applied for a permit. Much to our surprise, and to the surprise of our contractor, the permit application was refused after the city planners searched the property records and found the hard cover percentage looked to exceed the City limit of 25%. At that time we were told a survey would be required to properly set the percentage of hard cover. The survey did show the area of our hot is at 15,323 S.F. It also showed that when the house was built in 1991 the finished product was 4,574st; which was 4.9% over the amount of allowable hard cover at the time of construction; therefore, before anyone had occupied the house, it was encumbered with a hard cover violation. I think it's fair to assume that anyone purchasing this house would be unaware of the encumbrance that is attached to it, and I also think that it is fair to assume that anyone living in this house would want to use the area in the backyard, just off the kitchen, as a place to enjoy the outdoors. At some point, after the house was built, one of the owners did take advantage of this area and had a very nice stone patio installed with a stone stairway accessing the lower backyard. The addition of the stone patio and stairs has added 437 more SF to the bard cover of this property giving it a total of 5,011 SF and a percentage of 32.7 hard cover. As it stands, we purchased a home that has a 32.7% hard cover in a city that allows 25%. The original residence when built, occupied 29.9%, and a previous owner's stone patio occupies 2.8%. Let's face it; due to the hard cover encumbrance that came with the property, we really have nothing to work with except what is currently there. We don't feel that it is beyond reason to ask that we be allowed to use that area more efficiently. We would like to remove the stone patio and replace it with a smaller screen porch .The screen porch will be 117sf smaller and will add up to a reduction of hard cover of 0.8%. We have carefully searched our property to see if any other hardcover could be removed to lower our percentage and there is not 1 square foot that could be removed that is not essential to the residence. Jay Donohue ":uED EXISTING HARDDCOVER DWELLING CONCRETE DRIVEWAY STONE PATIO TOTAL HARDCOVER /.11.75I_��7,[�TII % HARDCOVER 2,771 SQ. FT. 306 SQ. FT. 1,497 SQ. FT. 437 SQ. FT. 55011 SQ. FT. 15,323 SQ. FT. 32.7% PROPOSED f MPCOVER DWELLING 2,771 SQ. FT. CONCRETE 306 SQ. FT. DRIVEWAY 1,497 SQ. FT. PROPOSED PORCH 320 SQ. FT. TOTAL HARDCOVER 49894 SQ. FT. AREA OF LOT % HARDCOVER 15,323 SQ. FT. 31.9% SCANNED IDVA= juni mN9 ! CA .n.... mmmm*A . a.plowrr NsysrlaL !AY DONOHUE l{V�ApAif.A1;Y�wild� R���L iYWAO1R1:wrJ.1r•IY rr4lrrdrlowy b4da�.larr �Y�Y Id.�Ir..R�W Y.41 �.11witr lrsYNr.IY wruia �J�.iia.q�e iw�l.Nvf.r�a�r.Yew4 ra�dirr4rir .ter .r a��.s.r.eara ; r�.yr��rrr��y 4o�••rrrart 1 Yywaarr.r�yW orr�i®drp�d/. 4 �r.��YnY1�Y.iww�r aKr tlr}�r wb�rlbrwlwd� ��, ��y�(��b ari�lYwlr�rreRY6wRr�.�_ yr.l�rw�ia�fPOW �' `r�YwY}ra�w. ��Y�aiY.r�.rp 1d�1Y.rwrf�lr�r wr*w.+`�n.a srsimwo mows a oanvawva +ors vrm M.rr1�^1W �Mrr Iranr.w..tr•ar.rrr r apmp�ba.vr sr.s.r.rr�a r�errrrZ.drr.d�+. P/COJ'V S60 114)WCOVAR "IST/NO M4"COVQR GRAPHIC SCALE m to m w 1 verse l DN'G. M. M9194 ����n��������`��J .::.. t!L' | _ �� -�k 2& R Q § ] )| q§ § , lot § �| || | ■ q §s || / || ! | ; |1 � � JM CUSTOM DESIGNS � _ ACM _ 7" —. or IRS 5CN..WCU JM CUSTOM DESIGNS .wx.y ... 2W OOWL46 DRIVE W4 VELr MN"3W Ka �• A"we.o s� ✓a►ji Property Card Taxpayer Information Taxpayer Name JAY B DONOHUE LAURIE E DONOHUE Mailing Address 6561 TROENDLE CIR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-9345 Property Address Address 6561 TROENDLE CIR City CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 Parcel ID Number 258690050 Parcel Information Uses Res 1 unit GIS Acres 0.35 Tax Acres Plat TROENDLE ADDITION Lot 004 Block 002 Tax Description Building Information Building Style 1 STORY Foundation Sq Ft 1932 Bedrooms 4 Year Built 1994 Finished Sq Ft 1932 Bathrooms 2.75 Other Garage Y Miscellaneous Information School District Watershed District Homestead Green Acres Ag Preserve 0276 WS 062 MINNEHAHA CREEK Y N N Assessor Information Estimated Market Value 2011 Values 2012 Values Last Sale (Payable 2012) (Payable 2013) Land $135,600.00 $128,800.00 Date of Sale 11/24/2009 Building $365,600.00 $361,900.00 Sale Value $575,000.00 Total $501,200.00 $490 700 00 Qualified/ O Unqualified 'sdaimer This information is to be used for reference purposes only Caner County does not guarantee accuracy of the material _onmined herein and is not responsible for misuse or misinterpretation. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Slatutes 466.03. Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this service aclmowledges mat th County shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agreesto defend, indemnify, and trod harmless the County from any and all claims brought by User, CARVER ds employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the users access or use of data provided. COUNTY Thursday, May 17, 2012 Carver County, MN Popp 1 of f SCANNED 6561 TROENDLE CIRCLE VARIANCE - PLANNING CASE 2012-07 $200.00 Variance $200.00 Notification Sign $50.00 Recording Escrow $450.00 TOTAL $450.00 Less Check #8568 from Jay Donohue $0.00 BALANCE CITY OF CHANHASSEN P O BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 05/18/2012 3:48 PM Receipt No. 00188437 CLERK: AshleyM PAYEE: Jay Bob Donohue 6561 Trowndle Cir Chanhassen MN 55317- Planning Case 2012-07 ------------------------------------------------------- Use & Variance 200.00 Notification Sign 200.00 Recording Escrow 50.00 Total Cash Check 8568 Change 450.00 0.00 450.00 0.00 Sr4MNFo LOCATION MAP 6561 Troendle Circle Variance Request Planning Case 2012-07 SUBJECT " PROPERTY ti . r PLAT OF SURVEY FOR: MICHAEL. HOMES LOT 4, BLOCK 2, TROENDLE ADD., CARVER COUNTY (1019.5) N 00006'52" W 144.00 (1012.6) 1019.5 Q 1012.E 5� O - DRAINAGE & U31 1ITY 3 (7)a- Io EASEMENT ` 46.08(7p27' TOP OF IRON j------ 13A TOP OF' IRON (1021.44) N 21.17 P (1021.8) �' (1017.48) rn 16.17 101 �ro 4) 0o N OI1 PROPOSED 1 .00, 1024.0 HOUSE J 1021.0 01 31.67 y h (1025.0) rL' O� r Ory lx O GARAGE 0.338 W1N13 c+ 16.67 ^ 7� D EX. c3 po -I' 1 6. R 00 W GAR. 11)) 0 11 N12" °'1026. 3.3' /�� (1025.2)EXISTI, .7 2 79.7 O fP iA"ON HOUSE T. ',• 30) (1024.23) It 10 2 25) - N n 18.10 00 5 W 1021.9 � (1021.9) ❑ .��� (1021 5 P A '`--�73021'355" (1024.6) Qom / rR = 60.0LIGHT 21) 25.29 00*22'16" E L �L 76.8 023. a as CURB 554616 R�-20.00 L = 19.47 \?�G�� �I X (102,3 51) X(1021.11) 1R0EN BENCHMARK: TOP OF NUT HYDRANT AT LOT 6 & LOT 7, BLOCK 2 ELEV.= 1026.64 ^.2'45to// %Y)pX, T C�✓vary+, Ge+f�' , ?.10✓ fb apif r4KCOu0�>rr�almrli2$A LEGEND 0 Iron monuments C ) existing elevations 0 proposed elevations i direction of proposed surface drainage ❑ set wood stake 1210 7 scANNEr PROPOSED ELEVATIONS 1017.2 lowest floor 1025.0 garage floor p� gg 1026.1 ,op of foundation PR® ■z, •" rill: Note: Only copies which bear an embossed seal are certified copies ®� , Hans,n Thorp Pellinen Olson Inc. I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my supervision and that I am a duly registered land surveyor under Minnesota Statutes Section 326.02 to 326.16. File No. 94-066 Book -Page Civil & Survey Engineers 7565 Office Ridge Circle Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3644 (612) 829-0700 `�-n -®�[ Date: // Registration No.�'�'ZS 94 -38 Scale " I -30 ' SCANNED ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING CO. 5300 S. Hwy. No. 101 Minnetonka, MN 55345 Phone (952) 474 7964 Fax (952) 225 0502 WWW.ADVSURCOM SURVEY FOR: JAY DONOHUE SURVEYED: April, 2012 DRAFTED: April 25, 2012 REVISED: April 25, 2012, to remove deck area from hardcover tabulations per client's request. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 4, Block 2, Troendle Addition, Carver County, Minnesota SCOPE OF WORK & LIMITATIONS: 1. Showing the length and direction of boundary lines of the above legal description. The scope of our services does not include determining what you own, which is a legal matter. Please check the legal description with your records or consult with competent legal counsel, if necessary, to make sure that it is correct, and that any matters of record, such as easements, that you wish shown on the survey, have been shown. 2. Showing the location of existing improvements we deemed important. 3. Setting new monuments or verifying old monuments to mark the comets of the property. 4. Showing and tabulating hard cover area and the area of the lot for your review and for the review of such governmental agencies that may have jurisdiction over hard cover requirements. 5. While we show proposed improvements to your property, we not as familiar with your plans as you are nor are we as familiar with the requirements of governmental agencies as their employees are. We suggest that you review the survey to confirm that the proposals are what you intend and submit the survey to such governmental agencies as may have jurisdiction over your project to gain their approvals if you can. STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS: "0" Denotes 1/2" ID pipe with plastic plug bearing State License Number 9235, set, unless otherwise noted. this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am per an441*fe"ional Surveyor under the Laws of the State of Minnesota. PROPOSEI0 ff"19COVER EXISTING HWFIOCYOVER S 89'38'57" W FOLIND RON--141.48-- Z N DRAINAGE & UTaRY EA ENT Oi I-- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - N 10 r \ a`� � BINMMWS DRIVE 00 o � b 0 O 1 II I 1 32.1 GRAPHIC SCALE (IN FEET ) 10 cb G I 29.9 ?'��iEjCl TING U NG.' 3. / N I .o I 5.0 rn I 37.2 I I i I ��1 �\ S 7233 56�� E h 10 10 RON PWA 100 O ? Ln O OD 1 O� FOUND IRON IoTYG. NO. 1220194 i '' iii 0 m NOTE... ALL DIMENSIONING IS TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE SHEATHING porch. A soil Litt on lion may 1 —OI It.lf '1 A TION PLAN N for the copstrEiCtion of a future addition. q SCALE: 114" = 1'-O L.l� u�RRISE pop 1�ii19�1ti`!�1)� �REiaD R3 j 1.5.3 SCANNF lU Y 6o�61 6E mill a m u� � J a UJ IW Q1 Ow � vov 4 7 z t4ot o OF i SCANNED 14 EXISTING NOTE... ALL DIMENSIONING IS TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE SHEATHING EXISTING WINDOW (STING DOOR L EXISTING WINDOW C'4 w rd REMOVE EXISTING DOOR NEW ROOF TRUSSES TO BARE ON EXISING GARAGE WALL SCREENED PORCH VAULTED CEILING PLT NIGHT CEDAR DECKING 151-6" X CENTERLINE OF VAULTED CEILING AT 5:12 PITCH SCREEN TO BE ATTACHED TO OUTSIDE OF 6X6 CEDAR POSTS W/ IX6 CEDAR ATTACHED TO OUTSIDE SURFACE TO SECURE SCREEN CEDAR RAILING, • MIN 36" HEIGHT TO MEET t Af CODE REQUIREMENTS s� - Q .1, it1 6X6 CEDAR Q (NON BEARING) 6X6 CEDAR n� (NON BEARING) 2 PLY SIt" MICROLLAMS DROPPED HEADER saaas ass s^/asasLuxazaagazzagasummaxag�.!I�^/�(L(J)[��1Q� VK SCREEN DOOR POST TYPICAL ATTACHED TO 6X6 (SEARING) CEDAR POST p Z ATTACHED TO NUMBER OF RISERS U U EXISTING HOUSE DEPENDS ON FINISHED Q GRADE CEDAR DECK LL`� �' '' r 7..'�1.4u CEDAR RAILING I�Iitt4"U�� * MIN 36" HEIGHT TO MEET HX329-"� CODE REQUIREMENTS W<MN NS ARE HpN� �A� N �EitiG rO CENree� 6x6POS� stairwi 1 U 1 MAIN FLOOR PLAN A3 SCALE: 1/4" a V-Oil A c0 ArtC �i7_AL of Fa6OF k.Y�eoeS`S we ' APpto jed We2Ue rl;,ed over �ater;�t5 StG�' lli Syi3°i+:Ji \liitS 2 PLY 2X12 TREATED JOISTS 16" CIA CONC FOOTING MIN 42" BELOW GRADE L TRUSSES + 24" O.G. O I-6X6 CEDAR POST CEDAR OVER SCREEN RAIL a MIN 36" HEIGHT TO MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS 5X4" CEDAR DECKING 2X12 TREATED JOISTS • lfo" O.C. SCANNEI) ,4 YER s � s Ul u1 W O Z O 4 � J V Q • U� O Z 14ON is OF