The URL can be used to link to this page

CAS-09_6645 HORSESHOE CURVE VARIANCENon -Scannable Item Item Description Folder Number Folder Name 6 6 q s Hof c vq, 11, +Ict Job Number (Z � 'Z ZG Box Number 00 3 � SONY CD-R u 5 i Ems` C1 lei pc�ia--ol &V,CCL#%,Ct. F,eJJkp"'U— r-ok UU�1 SUPHEMAS OWN M. 700MB Thomas J. Campbell Roger N. Knutson Thomas M. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Joel J. Jamnik Andrea McDowell Poehl, Soren M. Mattick John F. Kelly Henry A. Schaeffer, III Alina Schwartz Samuel J. Edmunds Marguerite M. McCarron 1380 Corpomtc Center Cur', Suite 317 • Eagan. MN 5511 651-452-5000 Fax 651-452-5550 www.ck-law.com CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association August 30, 2012 Ms. Kim Meuwissen City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Re: Chanhassen -- Miscellaneous Recording Dear Kim: / al SEP 3 2612 CITY 0r CHANHASSEN Enclosed herewith for your files are the following original, recorded documents: 1. Site Plan Permit #2012-03 between the City and 80 West 78"' Street, LLC, recorded on July 31, 2012, as Document No. T184640; 2. Variance 2012-03, recorded July 31, 2012, as Document No. T184641;and 3. Variance 2012-09, recorded July 31, 2012, as Document No. T184642. If you have any questions regarding the above, please give me a call. Very truly yours, CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association ByQ Carole J. Hoeft cjh Legal Assistant Enclosure Document No. OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF TITLES T 184642 CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA Receipt # RT 201200002308 Cert. # 34957 Fee: $46.00 Certified Recorded on 7/31/2012 at 10:00 VLAM ❑ PM 184642 1111111111111111111 Mark Lundren Registrar of Titles CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA VARIANCE 2012-09 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants the following variance: A 25-foot variance from the 75-foot Shoreland Management Setback to allow for the reconstruction of a patio on property zoned Single Family Residential IRSF). 2. Property. The variance is for property located at 6645 Horseshoe Curve in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as Lot 5, Rearrangement of Lots in Pleasant View, Carver County, Minnesota. 3. Condition. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions: a. The proposed deck can be no larger than indicated on the plan set provided with the revision dated June 14, 2012. b. The proposed deck cannot be covered or enclosed at a future date. c. Any proposed drainage, erosion control and grading must be shown on a plan and cannot be more than is required to meet the requirements of this project. The applicant shall work with staff to incorporate remedies to the erosion problem on the western portion of the site. d. The applicant must demonstrate that the patio cannot be constructed without retaining walls. Further, any walls determined necessary must meet the minimum height needed to achieve the above parameters. e. Any retaining walls exceeding 48" in height require a building permit and professional design. £ The top and toe of any wall determined necessary should be shown on the plan. g. Proposed finish elevation shall be shown on the southerly extent of the patio. h. No tree removal may occur as a result of this project. i. The hardcover must not exceed 25.9 percent of the lot area. There shall be no expansion of the water -oriented structure located on the site unless the portion of the proposal located in the Shoreland Management Setback is removed. 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. Dated: July 17, 2012 (SEAL) STATE OF MINNESOTA (as COUNTY OF CARVER CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor AND: �`�' ` J Q Todd Gerhardt, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thin day of 2012 by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor and Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of thanhassen, 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 NOTARYZUBLIC KIM T. MEUWISSEN Notary Public -Minnesota o �. My Gammissiorr Expires 3m W, 2015 Affidavit of Publication Southwest Newspapers CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN State of Minnesota) COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING )SS. PLANNING NOTICE S HEREBY GIVEN County of Carver ) that the Chanhassen Planning Com- mission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, July 17, 2012, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Laurie A. Hartman g y y n, being duly swom, on oath says that she is the publisher or the authorized Blvd. The purpose of this hearing agent of the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Vil- is to consider a variance to allow lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: for the reconstruction of a patio on property located in the Shoreland (A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal Management Setback and Single Family Residential Zoning District newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as (RSF) located at 6645 Horseshoe amended. Curve. Applicant: Josh Koller, Southview Design. Owner: Carol printed Affidavit public notice that is attached to this Adavit and identified as No. (g) The P Fieldhouse. was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said A plan showing the location of Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of the proposal is available for public the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both review on the City's web site at inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition www6chanhassen.mn.us/2012-09. and publication of the Notice: html or at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested per- sons are invited to attend this public abcdefghijkhnnopgrstuvwxyz hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. , Ashley Mellgren, Planning Intern % By t Email: amellgren&i.chanhassen. mn.us Laurie A. Hartmann Phone: 952-227-1132 (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on Thursday, July 5, 2012; No. 46%) Subscribed and swom before me on this 5 � day of _ `�, 2012 No lic I I clt!WlY1G JEri�V...r �.�w NDTE QARK NOTi11Y F( 91JG 611NNES6TA MJY(-MdISSiu^N EXPIRES01131ii3 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 percolumn inch Affidavit of Publication Southwest Newspapers CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN State of Minnesota) COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING )SS. PLANNG SE NO. 2012-09 NOTICE SAHEREBY GIVEN County of Carver ) that the Chanhassen Planning Com- mission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, July 17, 2012, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers et Chanhassen City Hall, Market Laurie A. Hartmann, being du] swom, on oath says that she is the publisher or the authorized g Y Y Blvd. The purpose of this hearing his agent of the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Vil- is to consider a variance to allow lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: for the reconstruction of a patio on property located in the Shoreland (A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal Management Setback and Single newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as Family Residential Zoning District amended. (RSF) located at 6645 Horseshoe Curve. Applicant: Josh Koller, Southview Design. Owner: Carol g The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No. ( ) P -m-Z Fiel Fieldhouse. was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice said A plan showing the location of Notice is hereby incorporated as pan of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of the proposal is available for public the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both review on the City's web site at inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition wwwci.chanhassen.mn.us/2012-09. and publication of the Notice: html or at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested per- sons are invited to attend this public abcdefghijklmnopgrstuvwxyz hearing and express their opinions I�, with respect this proposal. , �,A`Imo/Ashley 4ByLUQ�it Mellgren, Planning Intern g �� ` Y-�(Nu `- I-"4 Email: amellgren@ci.chanhmn.us Laurie A. Hartmann moos Phone: 952-227-1132 (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on Thursday, July 5, 2012; Subscribed and sworn before me on No. 4656 this 3 f day of 2012 No 94iiie M l TE BARKINNESOTARES Ot/31113 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 la-'o 5 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION IN RE: Application of Josh Koller for a Shoreland Management Setback variance to reconstruct a patio on property zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF) — Planning Case # 2012-09. On July 17, 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 5, Rearrangement of lots in Pleasant View Carver County, Minnesota 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 patio 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 reconstruction of the patio is that the existing patio does not comply with the Shoreland Management Setback. The proposed patio will continue the non -conformity. However, the property exceeds city code requirements for hard surface coverage by 3.2 percent. The applicant is proposing to reduce the hard surface coverage to 25.9 percent. Staff is recommending the hard surface be further reduced to 25 percent. This reduction will result in an improved condition compared to what is existing on 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 had an existing patio encroaching into the Shoreland Management Setback. The existing patio is eroding away. The proposed patio will encroach 25 feet into the setback. The owner is proposing to remove the existing patio and walkways and replace it with a smaller patio to reduce the overall hardcover. The reduction will result in an improved condition compared to what is existing on the site. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The construction of a patio 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 #2012-09, dated July 17, 2012, prepared by Ashley Mellgren, et al., is incorporated herein. "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves Planning Case #2012-09 for a 25-foot variance to the Shoreland Management Setback for the reconstruction of a patio on property zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF)." 2012. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments this 17th day of July, CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: Chairman 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. 7/24/12 2012-09 ATTENTION Carole Hoeft RE: Document Recording ® Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Change Order ❑ Pay Request ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION 1 7/17/12 12-09 Shoreland Management Setback Variance - 6645 Horseshoe Curve THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ For your use ❑ As requested ❑ For review and comment ❑ FORBIDS DUE REMARKS ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return ® For Recording ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US COPY TO: Josh Koller, Southview Design Tim & Carol Fieldhouse, 6645 Horseshoe Curve copies for approval copies for distribution corrected prints WSIGNE Pr — Kim Meu issen, (952) 227-1107 SCANNED If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. a -- CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA VARIANCE 2012-09 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants the following variance: A 25-foot variance from the 75-foot Shoreland Management Setback to allow for the reconstruction of a patio on property zoned Single Family Residential (RSF). 2. Property. The variance is for property located at 6645 Horseshoe Curve in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as Lot 5, Rearrangement of Lots in Pleasant View, Carver County, Minnesota. 3. Condition. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions: a. The proposed deck can be no larger than indicated on the plan set provided with the revision dated June 14, 2012. b. The proposed deck cannot be covered or enclosed at a future date. c. Any proposed drainage, erosion control and grading must be shown on a plan and cannot be more than is required to meet the requirements of this project. The applicant shall work with staff to incorporate remedies to the erosion problem on the western portion of the site. d. The applicant must demonstrate that the patio cannot be constructed without retaining walls. Further, any walls determined necessary must meet the minimum height needed to achieve the above parameters. e. Any retaining walls exceeding 48" in height require a building permit and professional design. f. The top and toe of any wall determined necessary should be shown on the plan. g. Proposed finish elevation shall be shown on the southerly extent of the patio. h. No tree removal may occur as a result of this project. i. The hardcover must not exceed 25.9 percent of the lot area. j. There shall be no expansion of the water -oriented structure located on the site unless the portion of the proposal located in the Shoreland Management Setback is removed. 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. Dated: July 17, 2012 (SEAL) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) CITY OF CHANHASSEN��//// r BY: `C✓ TQh,�omas A. Furlong, Mayor tzk A L AND: , ` Todd Gerhardt, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thi� day of 2012 by Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor and Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of thanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to authority granted by its City Council. NOTARtZUBLIC DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard j#ZK1WISSENP.O. Box 147 ' innesotaChanhassen, MN 55317res s+• pp15 (952)227-1100 I�-o5 July 23, 2012 CITY OF CI�ANI�ASSEN Mr. Josh Koller Southview Design 7700 Market Boulevard 1875 East 5& Street PO Box 147 Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Shoreland Management Setback Variance — 6645 Horseshoe Curve Administration Planning Case #2012-09 Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax:952.227.1110 Dear Mr. Koller: Building Inspections Phone:952.2271180 This letter is to confirm that on July 17, 2012, the Board of Appeals and Adjustments Fax:952.227.1190 approved a 25-foot variance into the 75-foot Shoreland Management Setback on property zoned Single Family Residential (RSF) for the reconstruction of a patio on Engineering property located at 6645 Horseshoe Curve subject to the following conditions: Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax:952.227.1170 1. The proposed deck can be no larger than indicated on the plan set provided with the revision dated June 14, 2012. Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax:952.227.1110 2. The proposed deck cannot be covered or enclosed at a future date. Park & Recreation 3. Any proposed drainage, erosion control, and grading must be shown on a plan and Phone:952.227.1120 cannot be more than is required to meet the requirements of this project. The Fax:952.227.1110 applicant shall work with staff to incorporate remedies to the erosion problems on Recreation Center the western portion of the site. 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone:952.227.1400 4. The applicant must demonstrate that the patio cannot be constructed without Fax:952.227.1404 retaining walls. Further, any walls determined necessary must be the minimum height needed to achieve the above parameters. Planning & Natural Resources Phone:952.227-1130 5. Any retaining walls exceeding 48 inches in height require a building permit and Fax:952.227.1110 professional design - Public works 6. The top and toe of any wall determined necessary should be shown on the plan. 7901 Park Place Phone:952.227.1300 7. Proposed finish elevation shall be shown on the southerly extent of the patio. Fax:952.227.1310 8. No tree removal may occur as a result of this project. Senior Center Phone:952.227.1125 Fax:952.227.1110 9. The hard cover must not exceed 25.9 percent of the lot area. Web Site 10. There shall be no expansion of the water -oriented structure located on the site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us unless the portion of the proposal located in the Shoreland Management Setback is removed. SCANNED Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Todayand Planning for Tomorrow Mr. Josh Koller July 23, 2012 Page 2 If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (952) 227-1132 or amellgren@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. Sin rely, Ashley Mel?en Planning Intern c: Tim and Carol Fieldhouse, 6645 Horseshoe Curve Building Permit File — 6645 Horseshoe Curve ec: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director Terry Jeffery, Water Resources Coordinator Jerry Mohn, Building Official gAp1an\2012 planning cnre \2012-09 6645 horseshoe curve shoreland setback variance\approval lener.doc CIT"� OF CHANHASSEN P O BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 07/27/2012 3:37 PM Receipt No. 00194192 CLERK: AshleyM PAYEE: Southview Design Inc 1875 50th Street E Inver Grove Heights MN 55077- Planning Case 2012-09 ------------------------------------------------------- GIS List 60.00 Total Cash Check 28976 Change 60.00 0.00 60.00 0.00 SOUTHVIEW DESIGN, INC. CIT33 City of Chanhassen 7-03-12 07-05-12 Labels 7-17-12 28976 SCANNEU If 28976 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 cm of (952) 227-1100 mmm To: Mr. Josh Koller Southview Design 1875 East 5dh Street Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 Invoice SALESPERSON DATE TERMS KTM 7/5/12 upon receipt QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 20 Property Owners List within 500' of 6645 Horseshoe Curve (20 labels) $3.00 $60.00 TOTAL DUE $60.00 NOTE: This invoice is in accordance with the Development Review Application submitted to the City by the Addressee shown above (copy attached) and must be [)aid prior to the public hearing scheduled for July 17, 2012. Make all checks payable to: City of Chanhassen Please write the following code on your check: Planning Case #2012-09. If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESSI Chanhassen Planning Commission— July 17, 2012 0--09 PUBLIC HEARING: 6645 HORSESHOE CURVE: REOUEST FOR A MORELAND SETBACK VARIANCE ON PROPERTY ZONED SINGLE FAMH.Y RESIDENTIAL (RSF)APPLICANT• JOSH KOLLER. SOUTHVIEW DESIGN. OWNER: TIMOTHY FIELDHOUSE PLANNING CASE 2012-09 Mellgren: Good evening. The City has received a variance request from applicant Josh Koller with Southview Design. The property owners are Tim and Carol Fieldhouse. The property is located on Lotus Lake. The address 6645 Horseshoe Curve. The applicant is requesting a 25 foot setback to encroach into the 75 foot shoreland management setback to allow for the reconstruction of a patio on the lakeshore side of a property zoned RSF. There are several existing conditions that the applicant and the homeowner are concerned with. The existing patio, staircase and walkways have begun to erode away and have created uneven walking surfaces. The missing stones have created areas that have one half inch to one inch differentiation in the surface level. The applicant has proposed a deck as a safer alternative to the existing step from the house to the patio. Staff would like to note that the deck was not part of the variance application. However is considered a replacement to the non -conformity rather than an addition. According to current building standards the step rise should be 7 and 314 inches and this step exceeds that requirement. The homeowners have expressed a lot of concern regarding erosion taking place the westerly protrusion of the patio. This erosion is likely resulting from directed discharge from the hard cover. Currently the site is exceeding the 25% maximum allowable hard surface coverage by 3.27%. The applicant is proposing to reconstruct a patio encroaching into the 75 foot shoreland management setback by 25 feet. This is an additional 13 foot encroachment into the setback than the existing patio as shown as the image in the middle. The red line is the 75 foot setback from the OHW. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing staircase, walkway and patio shown in the blue on the existing plan to reconstruct the patio shown on the right image. This will reduce the hard cover from 28.27 to 25.9 percent which is 867 square feet. Staff believes the proposed design has a possibility through the reduction in impervious surface to improve the water quality of the stormwater runoff from the site. Staff further recognizes that the project constitutes an expansion of a non -conforming use. However the net benefits of the water quality and potential screening of the patio as viewed from the public water may outweigh any deleterious effects of this expansion. The granting of the variance is in keeping with the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance. The construction of a patio is a normal use associated with a single family residence. The practical difficulty with the reconstruction of this patio is that the existing patio currently does not comply with the shoreland management setback. The proposed patio will continue the non -conformity. However the property exceeds the City Code requirements for hard surface coverage by 3.2%. The applicant is proposing to reduce the hard cover, or hard surface coverage to 25.9% and staff is recommending the hard surface be further reduced to 25%. This reduction will likely result in improved conditions compared to what is on the site. Staff is recommending the approval of the 25 foot shoreland management setback variance for the reconstruction of the patio, Planning Case #2012-9 and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decisions subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. This concludes the staff report. Aller: I know we sent out postcards. Were there any responses? Mellgren: I did not receive any. Aller: So no negative responses from neighbors or? Mellgren: No. Aller: Okay. And has the applicant been made aware of the findings and the request for the reduction to the 25? SCANNED Chanhassen Planning Commission — July 17, 2012 Mellgren: They did receive a copy of the staff report Aller. Any other questions from anyone? Comments? Okay. Would the applicant like to step forward and be heard? Josh Koller, Hi, Josh Koller. I'm with Southview Design. Our address is in Inver Grove Heights. 1875 East 500' Street so, a couple things on this_ The property owners have only been here for 2 years on this property. This house was built in I think 1918 or something like that. Obviously there weren't any of the issues with hard cover surfaces or anything like that. Permits weren't pulled for patios, these types of things. We appreciate the approval of the City or the you know asking for approval from the City here on this. Going all the way down to the 25% is going to be a very difficult thing. We're already shrinking over 800 square feet of hard cover on this property. Right now with the existing condition we've got overhead trees. We've got the hill that slopes down. We do have erosion problems, stuff like that. We are planning on planting that. There's a retaining wall being proposed in the design to help with the erosion as well. You know that's where we're looking at you know again we've dropped over 800 square feet here so we're trying to get it as close as we can. If we keep shrinking that up, I mean we're just not going to have anything back there. The other point that the City had mentioned was, you know that Ashley had mentioned was the deck not being part of this. The deck was submitted by another company that was doing the deck work to get approval for a permit on the deck so I guess I was under the assumption that it's basically a large landing was separate and was getting approved for a permit there so those are the kind of the things that we have issues with you know going forward with this project. We're just trying to eliminate a lot of hard cover issues and it's pretty bad right now. If you walk out on site it's, not only is it you know not a very comfortable, usable space but it's fairly dangerous. They've had people trip on the patio. There's big gaps on there and the stairs arejust falling apart altogether. A lot of that has to do with a lot of erosion issues and how it's running down the hillside there so that's kind of what we're looking at doing. Aller: With the other conditions on, for instance on the. Josh Koller. Yep, the 9. There was 10 conditions total. Aller: You obviously have read them all. Josh Koller: Yep. Alley: You understand what they're asking for. You've met with them. Josh Koller. Yep. Allen Is there a problem meeting any? Josh Koller. Nope. All of those are fine. That's pretty basic. Usually when we submit for a permit we're going to put a plan together for erosion control. Whether they want silt logs or whether we want You know, it really doesn't matter to us. We can submit that. The elevation piece for the plan that's, those are very easy pieces for us to submit so everything on there was fine. Aller: Okay. Josh Koller: It's just trying to get to that, you know we're already going down like I said so much square footage there and we are trying to get into that 25%. We're just a little above it. 4 F Chanhassen Planning Commission —July 17, 2012 Aller: And the overstory trees will stay? Josh Koller: Yep. We're not taking any of the trees out. There is one diseased pine that we might want to talk about. We can get an arborist out there but that actually has nothing to do with what we're doing here. It's not even in the area so, yeah Yep. Aller. And so could you explain the difficulty and the difference between what planning is requesting, what the Code basically requires which is the 25. Josh Koller: The 25, yeah. Aller: And the 25.9. What are we talking about in reality? Josh Koller. I didn't do the calculation so I guess I don't know. I'm assuming it's probably going to be, you know it's a pretty good sized lot so it might be even a couple hundred square feet I suppose. I guess I didn't do the calculation on that. We have a couple things with this lot. I mean it is a pie shaped lot. They moved the house you know when they built the house in 1918 or whatever clear back by the lake. Well one thing we have is we do have a very long driveway going to there and different things like that but then like I said this back patio was just really expansive and you know the biggest thing is we were trying to shrink it down to get to that area. If we shrink it much more than that I mean they're just not going to have much of an even a place to sit and they like to, just like everybody, like to at least have a table and chairs out there. The new patio, I think the square footage is I think 400 and some square feet. I don't recall so it's not very big you know so we're just again, just trying to create a little bit of usable space. I'm never going to get good grass to grow underneath there anyway so erosion's always going to be something. That's one of the big things with the retaining wall is to stop that and then you know we're also, we are going to have to set some boulder outcrops in there to help with that but you know what it's like when you have a hillside, if I just mulch it and plant it, I mean it's just going to rush down anyway and so otherwise they're just going to have a mulch patio which obviously isn't going to work very well either so. Aller: And the square footage now of the patio? Josh Koller. It says on here. I believe, I'm song I would have to find that. Well the square footage of the patio now is, I mean I guess I'm reducing it to the 8, by 867 square feet so I mean it's fairly, fairly expansive. I'd have to get back to you on that. I don't know what the exact square footage is on that, unless I have it on the. Aanenson: Chairman I think that staff would know the answer to that if you'd like us to answer that. Alley: Sure. I want a real good understanding of what we're talking about in reduction from what's there now to what is proposed. Josh Koller: Flagstone, if I can answer that. Mellgren: Yeah. Josh Koller: It's right here. The flagstone patio right now, that's there right now is 1,293 square feet. Colopoulos: And you're going down to 400? Josh Koller. And we are going down to. Chanhassen Planning Commission — July 17, 2012 Mellgren: 426. Aanenson: Can you say it louder Ashley. Josh Koller: Yeah, 426. So I mean. Colopoulos: An extra 9 percent, .9 percent would be approximately 360 square feet so. Josh Koller: Yeah so I mean they wouldn't have anything. Colopoulos: You wouldn't be left with much. Allen. You wouldn't be left with anything. Josh Koller. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks for the calculations. I'm a landscaper, not a math guy. Allen. And my understanding is that all the, they're new to the lot, that the actual prior patio and all the work was done pre permits? Before they were... Josh Koller: Yes. Oh yeah, I mean they were done. Aller. So the City wasn't aware of anything and they certainly weren't in a position to control or do anything when they came in. Josh Koller: No. Aller: Other than what they're doing now which is asking for the variance. Josh Koller: Yep, that's correct. They've been there 18 months so not even 2 years so Allen. Any other questions? Concerns? Comments? Thank you. Would anyone else like to come up and speak on behalf of the applicant? No? Seeing no one come forward we'll close the public hearing. Questions or comments for. How do we feel about the difference between the 25 and the 25.9 because that's really what it boils down to at this point. And I'll start off by saying a substantial reduction this is from the 1,349 and that I would, I think we appreciate, I certainly do, people coming in and asking for a variance rather than just doing and asking for forgiveness later and creating a big problem where the City has to come in and make alternations and do something else so we're looking at something that is better than what was there and it's not perfect. It's not optimum but I think that's what variances are all about. Okay. Colopoulos: Want a motion? Ready for a motion or are we still in public hearing? Aller: No, the public hearing's closed. Thomas: Oh you did that? Colopoulos: You closed it? Oh you didn't have the microphone on. Aller: Let's make sure for the record that the public hearing is opened. And no one coming forward it's closed. So any other comments, questions? Thoughts. Chanhassen Planning Commission — July 17, 2012 Hokkanen: Well I have a question, just so I'm reading this right. So if we approve this as it is the condition of going down to 25 percent. Alley: Would be. Hokkanen: A requirement or could we strike that? Allen. If we approve it as is it's 25%. Is you want to modify it. Hokkanen: We can modify each one, okay. Alley: Then you would need to say that it would be 25.9 which is what the request is. Hokkanen: Alright, that's what I wanted to clarify. That answers my question. Colopoulos: I move that the Chanhassen Planning Commission acting as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals approves the reconstruction of a patio in the Shoreland Management Setback, Planning Case #2012-09 and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision subject to conditions 1 through 8 and condition 10. Alley: So we're... Colopoulos: And leaving condition 9. Allen: In it's entirety or modified? Colopoulos: In it's entirety. Thomas: I would say modified to the 25.9. Colopoulos: To 25.9. To 25.9, okay. Modifying. Alley: Make it clear. Colopoulos: Yes, let me restate that last part okay. Subject to conditions I through 8 and condition 10 as written, modifying condition 9 to read, existing hard cover must be reduced no more than 25.9 percent of the lot area. Hokkanen: Second it. Alley: I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Colopoulos moved, Hokkanen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, approves the request for the reconstruction of the patio located within the Shoreland Management Setback located on Lot 5, Rearrangement of lots in Pleasant View, based on the staff report and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decision, with the following conditions: 1. The proposed deck can be no larger than indicated on the plan set provided with the revision dated June 14, 2012. Chanhassen Planning Commission —July 17, 2012 2. The proposed deck cannot be covered or enclosed at a future date. 3. Any proposed drainage, erosion control and grading must be shown on a plan and cannot be more than is required to meet the requirements of this project. The applicant shall work with staff to incorporate remedies to the erosion problems on the western portion of the site. 4_ The applicant must demonstrate that the patio cannot be constructed without retaining walls. Further, any walls determined necessary must be the minimum height needed to achieve the above parameters. 5. Any retaining walls exceeding 48 inches in height require a building permit and professional design. 6. The top and toe of any wall determined necessary should be shown on the plan. 7. Proposed finish elevation shall be shown on the southerly extent of the patio. 8. No tree removal may occur as a result of this project. 9. The existing hardcover must be reduced to no more than 25.9% of the lot area. 10. There shall be no expansion of the water -oriented structure located on the site unless the portion of the proposal located in the Shoreland Management Setback is removed. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION: REOUEST FOR A METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION CREATING TWO LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED AGRICULTURAL (A-2) AND LOCATED AT 1551 LYMAN BOULEVARD. APPLICANT/OWNER: RICK DORSEY, PPB HOLDINGS, LP. PLANNING CASE 2012-08. Aanenson: The applicant is requesting a metes and bounds subdivision to create two lots from a 20 acre parcel. Parcel C is 4 acres and Parcel D is 16 acres. The 40 acre parcel is being split into two lots via an administrative subdivision, and I'll go through this in detail in a minute. So the administrative subdivision by State Statute requires city approval on that. That action has not taken place yet. The proposed subdivision does meet the metes and bounds would meet the city ordinances with conditions of approval. So the subject site is located on Lyman Boulevard. Even for an administrative subdivision to occur properties have to have access to the site so the two access points right now, so when we look at the subdivision which I'll show you in a second, the administrative subdivision, there's an access point via this street here which is on the LDK development. The Preserve and then the other one's over the existing driveway so that allows the first split of the property. There were several applicable regulations which I'll explain in a little bit more detail as we go through the development itself but again the main one is that the City can approve a metes and bounds subdivision so this is different than a plat. It's a metes and bounds but it has to have access onto a public right-of-way is one of the criteria so we haven't seen too many of these specifically since my tenure here. This is the first time we've done a metes and bounds with this type of thing inside an urban service area. Typically they're platted. So the other, and as I explained it is exempt. The metes and bounds from the subdivision. Excuse me, the administrative is exempt. The metes and bounds does require city approval. Chapter 20 also comes into consideration and that's the density. If you're outside the urban service area we have a requirement of density allocation. Non -Scannable Item Kom ll () Description_ l 'Folder Number Folder Name �S o(s` JhOe cvlJe VhJance ��'''�,� Job Number Box Number '� Fieldhouse Photos 6645 Horseshoe Curve Chanhassen, MN 55317 SONY cp-p SOUTHVIEW sDESIGNr `land�cnp<mnnn�ron � Josh Koller Landunp< D<.16ner N'tn, 1895 East 50th Street Inver Grove Heights Minnesota 55079 851.203.3028 851.455.1734 651-248.3961 jkoeer«eoutrtvlewtleeign.mm • Outdoor Living • Commercial & Residential • Professional Planning • Greenscapes • Waterscapes • Irrigation • Hardscapes • Concrete Pavers • Custom Services mww. south viemdesign. com PbSOXG fppl,«G i1MVE. FR: SOUfHVMW DESIGN T�w.m ww m s cam.camn.m® EaanyAmwee HorJe�vE: SPEe n Fx..d E bli irI 1%E LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVEYORS RFGISTETEDO RTHE I WS OF STATE OF 4MNESOTA Surueyurs C4eriifirttie HOR5EHOE CARVE INVOICE NO. M21 FRNO. 10 31 SCALE: V= 39 .� IX/SnNG HARDCOVER RaaNcrce 316s.k P hcs 461 .k Garage 500,.ft 5 sq.k 0.rveway 43 3 eg.k 12 /'/agsax 154 1sg0 55.k Lm¢re[e 1, lov/ Hardcavcr = .k Aruof Parcel=]340 agsg.k P hyc o/Hardrow'r=28.2]% W 5. REIRRANG.3 OF LOTS W PLFASANF V W C Ca . Mi®vua TNaA'avrreflwawlmn [l�MrsiNwi4 mvYn ImEN ev Npn.a�.a�PC Irvtl VAo�q'�2o vaw w s.a .mp4.lm.p e.l i an . ap IbuH w Suwy.0 Cy Ipyy p1AM Z1113. MYCNiED In SLRKv f SOUTHVIEW DESIGN NOPuly ioW YS Oma CmaY.Nv Pmmny AE6vcm IbsYis\: Spiel E4nW FYtl10 .1. LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVEYORS 0.EGISlEAE0IMI1E0.1NE LAWS OF SIA.OF LIRMFSOTA r�psAirr®e�m exa]ev>u �urvtyvrs C2erfifirtttr HOR9EHOE CARVE INVOICE NO. 80131 F.B.NO. 10 31 SCALE: V e 37 •us O L'�sevWu�a Eewmn• ,.rra IXISPNG HARDCOVER RcsHrncc 3l6sq.k Pordes 461 xl.k Garage 12 3S43 a W,..ft Shed .k +'eA'ry qk f�ay�.tax /293,sq.k lmcrcic /10555 0 5 k TaW HaPdeOVer = 340 aq.R ArmdPa a=3]340-2 PcrccrexJe d nardca�cr = 2B 2]% PROP03ED HARDCOVER Rcwdcr� 3/0x1.k Porlhe5 46, sq k Gaagc 320 aq.R Shed 43 xA D^K /Y 4S43 sq.k C . Pa 42 sq.k P2q. ,H 426 xpk ioGl roP,e —3 76 O .s A Arm dPins/ = 3]340 = 2 Pnemtage d Hardcover = 25.5% Lm 5, REARRANGMENT OF LOTS IN PLEASANT VIEW C. Camry, 3Rirmda 3m uN ewmti auw� u. wn ow a nme> worm P�umeeMaaa i rPM1 M ei em. serum.. a lam/ A P'aar b m o uer�roanaw.4+mse Nl�neil/Ys lYN SUYI/v u tr b M a 6 SUY a eies� s...I.avr+�esaammrz ,�1 EXI5TING CONDITIONS 5URVEY FOR: SOUTHVIEW DESIGN Property located in Section 1, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota. Property Address: 6645 Horseshoe Curve, Chanhassan, MN 55317 Benchmark: Spike in willow next to shoreline of lake now southeast lot comer. Elevation= 897.8 feet 904. Established in 1962 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVEYORS REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA 7601 73rd Avenue North (763) 560-3093 Minneapolis, Mimtesots 55428 Fax No. 560-3522 3ururUurs C�rrtifirtttr 905.3 t'7� 2 905.7 \ I � HOR.SEHOE CURVE \ \ 1 \ R-4J06, 572Yfa\A=23°905.3 / \ / i ♦ r\ 899.9 900.1 Power Polio 1 \ I \ 1 Nag g 1 a stone 1 9�4 \\— _ — —. -- 903.d 9Ce ne6 ♦. 24.0\ gas m arch IJ`\C` lec meter Flagstone to be removed see 3'te Plan Ty 903.6 found rron on One 904.7 L 904.3 ' found iron on line —.904- t_ z� sin O` O 5HORELINE T N 9 csE�2 9h S c''f�`•` ` \\ 19 I%- o4- 1. \ c \ rca/i \ \ \ \ taycCv INVOICE NO. 80221 F.B.NO. 1060-31 SCALE: 1" = 30' 0 Denotes Found Iron Monument O Denotes Iron Monument x000.0 Denotes Existing Elevation Denotes Existing contour Basis for bearings is assumed EX15TING HARDCOVER Residence 3 / 04 sq. ft Porches 46 / sq. ft Garage 520 sq. ft Shed 60 sq. ft Orlveway 4943 sq. ft Flagstone l 293 sq. ft Concrete 154 sq. ft Total Hardcover = l 0555 sq. ft Area of Parcel = 37340 sq. ft Percentage of Hardcover = 25.2796 Lot 5, REARRANGMENT OF LOTS IN PLEASANT VIEW Carver County, Minnesota The only easements shown are from plats of record or information provided by client. I certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Surveyed this 1st day of June 2012. Signed 9,--- '� Grego P"9A, Minn. Reg. No. 24992 PROPOSED SITE SURVEY FOR: SOUTHVIEW DESIGN Property located in Section 1, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota. Property Address: 6645 Horseshoe Curve, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Benchmark: Spike in willow next to shoreline of lake near southeast lot corner. Elevation = 897.8 feet Established in 1962 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVEYORS REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA 7601 73rd Avenue North (763) 560.3093 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 Fax No. 560-3522 3urur�jnrg C�rrttfirntr 905..3 n Z 905.7 �— 1 •\1 904.71 HOR5EHOE CPRVE \ \ \ L=JO6 \ R=4prat 9ne.. \ ( 699.9 900.1 -. \ Power Pole \ l j stone cli \ v \ uJ x _ \ \ I O In \ � O \\ N 903.15 03.6 yr 0c \ 24.0 \ 14.2 \ 903.3 Po gas meter \ found mart on hr rCh _ 3nG tto� lec meter \ 4 Res/deuce No, 64945 WWWA 904.3 ound iron on Ime sec is INVOICE NO. 80221 F.B.NO. 1060-31 SCALE: 1" = 30' • Denotes Found Iron Monument O Denotes Iron Monument x000.0 Denotes Existing Elevation Denotes Exlsting Contour EXISTING HARDCOVER Residence 3 / 04 sq. ft Porches 461 sq. ft Garage 520 sq. ft Shed 60 sq. ft Driveway 4943 sq. ft Flagstone l 293 sq. ft Concrete l 54 sq. ft Total Hardcover = l 0555 sq. ft Area of Parcel = 37340 sq. ft Percentage of Hardcover = 25.27910 PROP05EO HARDCOVER Residence 3 / 04 sq. ft Porches 461 sq. ft Garage 520 sq. ft Shed 80 sq. ft Driveway 4943 sq. ft Concrete l 54 sq. ft Prop. Patio 426 sq. ft Total Hardcover = 9665 sq. ft Area of Parcel = 37340 sq. ft Percentage of Hardcover = 25.97o Lot 5, REARRANGMENT OF LOTS IN PLEASANT VIEW Carver County, Minnesota The only easements shown are from plats of record or information provided by client. 1 certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duty Licensed land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Surveyed this 1st day of June 2012. Stned 9" /� , z GrO906 Pra , Mirm. Reg. No. 24992 PROPOSED MOTION: "The Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, approves the reconstruction of a patio in the Shoreland Management Setback, Planning Case #2012-09, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision, subject to conditions one through ten. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a Shoreland Management Setback variance to allow for the reconstruction of a patio. LOCATION: 6645 Horseshoe Curve Lot 5, Rearrangement of lots in Pleasant View Carver County, Minnesota APPLICANT: Josh Koller 1875 East 50a' Street Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 612-248-3961 PROPERTY OWNER: Carol Fieldhouse 6645 Horseshoe Curve Chanhassen, MN 55317 952-913-2402 PRESENT ZONING: Single Family Residential District (RSF) 2030 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density (1.2 — 4 units per acres) ACREAGE: 0.86 acres (37,340 square feet) 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 in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. Fieldhouse Variance Request Planning Case 2012-09 July 17, 2012 Page 2 of 8 PROPOSAL SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a variance to encroach into the 75-foot shoreland setback to allow for the reconstruction of a patio on the lakeshore side of the property. The current home is set back 75.9 feet from the OHW of Lotus Lake. The current patio is set back 63 feet from the OHW. The property is zoned Single Family Residential (RSF) and has a maximum allowable hard surface coverage of 25%. Currently the property is at 28.27% hard surface coverage. The contractor and property owner are requesting to reconstruct the patio and staircase and add a retaining wall. The proposed patio would be set back 50 feet from the OHW and would encroach into the 75-foot Shoreland Management Setback by 25 feet. The requested variance would reduce the hard surface coverage from 28.7% to 25.9%. SHORELAND STANDARD EXISTING PROPOSED REQUIRED Structure Setback 63 feet 50 feet 75 feet Impervious Surface 28.27% 25.9% 25% Staff is recommending approval of the variance request with ten conditions. ADJACENT ZONING: The properties to the north, east and west of the subject property are zoned Single Family Residential (RSF). The lake is located to the south of the site. Access to the site is via Horseshoe Curve to the north of the property. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS • Chapter 20, Division 3, Variances. • Chapter 20, Division 4, Non -conforming Uses • Chapter 20, Article XH, Shoreland Management District • Chapter 20, Article XII, Single Family Residential (RSF) district The property is located on Lot 5, Rearrangement of Lots in Pleasant View, Carver County, Minnesota and is zoned Single Family Residential (RSF). The site is located just south of Horseshoe Curve and is located on the northern part of Lotus Lake. Lotus Lake is a Recreational Development Lake with an Ordinary High Water Level of 896.3 feet. The Rearrangement of Lots in Pleasant View was recorded in 1916 and the original house was built in 1918. The construction of the original house predates the Shoreland District Regulations but still conforms to the 75-foot Shoreland Setback. Several additions to the house have taken place since the original construction. In 2001 the previous owner added a 32-foot x 20-foot addition. The addition replaced the initial porch and deck which was built in 1988. The initial deck encroached into the 75-foot setback by five feet. The addition maintained the 75-foot setback. Fieldhouse Variance Request Planning Case 2012-09 July 17, 2012 Page 3 of 8 Properties located in the Shoreland Management District are allowed one water -orientated accessory structure that does not meet the normal structure setback. The property has a shed located 40 feet from the Ordinary High Water level. This structure does comply with water - orientated accessory structure standards set forth in City Code, Chapter 20, Article VII, Section 20-481, Subdivision 2. The City does not have record of a permit for the current patio and walkway. However, permits were not required for the construction of patios prior to 2004. Staff reviewed city records to determine if hard surface variances and shoreland setback variances have been granted along Horseshoe Curve, Lotus Trail and Pleasant View Road. These streets have properties abutting Lotus Lake. There have been a number of variances approved in this area for front and side yard setbacks to construct decks, houses and garages. The following table highlights shoreland setback and hard surface coverage variances in proximity to the subject property. Address Variance File Number Variance Action 3-foot variance to the side yard 469 Pleasant setback, 29-foot variance to the View Road 1984-16 Shoreland Management Setback Denied to allow for the construction of a swimming pool, deck and spa. 6605 20-foot variance to the Horseshoe 1991-09 Shoreland Management Setback Approved with Curve to allow for the construction of a conditions sin le family residence. Fieldhouse Variance Request Planning Case 2012-09 July 17, 2012 Page 4 of 8 Address Variance File Number Variance Action 5.2-foot variance to the side yard setback, 1.2-foot variance to the side yard setback,I percent variance from the 25 percent 6650 Lotus maximum impervious surface Trail 1998-14 requirement, 7,000 square -foot Approved variance from the minimum lot size requirement, 50-foot variance to the minimum lot width/street frontage for the construction of an addition 16-foot variance to the front yard setback, 5-foot variance to the side 6681 yard setback, and 4 percent Horseshoe 2002-10 variance to the 25 percent Approved Curve maximum impervious surface requirement to allow for the construction of a garage and house addition. ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to reduce the impervious surface coverage by 2.37 percent to reconstruct a patio encroaching into the Shoreland Management Setback by 13 additional feet. The additional encroachment allows the property owner the opportunity to construct a patio. A patio is considered to be a reasonable and normal use of a single-family residential property. The new configuration will significantly reduce the hard surface coverage on the site by 867 square feet, resulting an adjustment from 28.27 percent to 25.9 percent. There is an additional building permit application filed with the city for the proposed deck that is indicated on the plan. The deck is proposed to create a safer transition from the house to the patio and replaces a portion of the existing patio. The current step does not comply with building code. Decks are not considered impervious surface and are not calculated in the hard surface calculations. Fieldhouse Variance Request Planning Case 2012-09 July 17, 2012 Page 5 of 8 The proposal will require additional grading to take place on the property. Grading can occur in the Shoreland Setback but must meet the conditions set forth in Minnesota Rules 6120.3300 Subp 4 — Zoning Provisions for Shorelands. The grading must also comply with the conditions set forth in Chanhassen City Code §20-481— Placement and height of structures in the Shoreland Management District and §20-482 — Shoreland Alterations. Staff believes the reconstruction of the patio will increase the safety of the site. Currently the patio and walkways are uneven and many areas could cause a person to trip and fall. Staff further believes that the proposed reduction in hardcover will result in a net decrease in runoff from the site. This benefit may provide a remedy for the erosion taking place on the site. Fieldhouse Variance Request Planning Case 2012-09 July 17, 2012 Page 6 of 8 SITE CONDITIONS The site is largely wooded which may provide screening from the public water. The trees will also result in greater abstraction and less stormwater runoff than would be produced form a typical residential lawn maintained in blue grass. The site shows indications of erosion. The observed erosion is downstream of the more westerly protrusion of the existing patio and is likely the result of directed discharge from the hardcover. The grade to the lake ranges from 6.9 percent to 12.9 percent with one 13-foot run at a grade of 30.8 percent. There is no bluff located on the property. The proposed deck as shown on the plan is proposed as a solution to the step from the inside of the house to the patio. The patio would encroach into the setback but would be considered as a replacement of the non- conformity rather than an addition. According to current Building Code, the step rise should be no more than 7-3/4". The existing step exceeds this requirement. It should be noted that the applicant has not included the deck as part of the variance application. The applicant and property owner are largely concerned with the existing condition of the flagstone patio, walkway and staircase. Fieldhouse Variance Request Planning Case 2012-09 July 17, 2012 Page 7 of 8 The staircase has begun to erode away and has created an uneven walking path. The applicant and the property owner feel the existing patio and staircase should be considered as unsafe and unusable. Missing stones in the staircase and patio have created areas of one-half inch and one inch differentiation in surface level. The proposed design has the possibility through the reduction of impervious surface to improve the water quality of the stormwater runoff from the site. Staff recognizes that the project constitutes an expansion of a non -conforming use. The net benefits to the water quality and potential screening of the patio as viewed from the public water appear to outweigh any deleterious effects of the expansion. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the request for the reconstruction of the patio located within the Shoreland Management Setback located on Lot 5, Rearrangement of Lots in Pleasant View, based on the staff report and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decision, with the following conditions: 1. The proposed deck can be no larger than indicated on the plan set provided with the revision dated June 14, 2012. 2. The proposed deck cannot be covered or enclosed at a future date. 3. Any proposed drainage, erosion control and grading must be shown on a plan and cannot be more than is required to meet the requirements of this project. The applicant shall work with staff to incorporate remedies to the erosion problems on the western portion of the site. Fieldhouse Variance Request Planning Case 2012-09 July 17, 2012 Page 8 of 8 4. The applicant must demonstrate that the patio cannot be constructed without retaining walls. Further, any walls determined necessary must be the minimum height needed to achieve the above parameters. 5. Any retaining walls exceeding 48 inches in height require a building permit and professional design. 6. The top and toe of any wall determined necessary should be shown on the plan. 7. Proposed finish elevation shall be shown on the southerly extent of the patio. 8. No tree removal may occur as a result of this project. 9. The existing hardcover must be reduced to no more than 25% of the lot area. 10. There shall be no expansion of the water -orientated structure located on the site unless the portion of the proposal located in the Shoreland Management Setback is removed. ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Decision. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced copy of the existing lot survey. 4. Reduced copy of the proposed lot survey. 5. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. gAp1an12012 planning cases\2012d19 6645 horseshoe curve shoreland setback variance\staff report 6645 horseshoecurve.doe CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION IN RE: Application of Josh Koller for a Shoreland Management Setback variance to reconstruct a patio on property zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF) — Planning Case # 2012-09. On July 17, 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 5, Rearrangement of lots in Pleasant View Carver County, Minnesota 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 patio 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 reconstruction of the patio is that the existing patio does not comply with the Shoreland Management Setback. The proposed patio will continue the non -conformity. However, the property exceeds city code requirements for hard surface coverage by 3.2 percent to 25.9 percent. Staff is recommending the hard surface be further reduced to 25 percent. This reduction will result in an improved condition compared to what is existing on 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 had an existing patio encroaching into the Shoreland Management Setback. The existing patio is eroding away. The proposed patio will encroach 25 feet into the setback. The owner is proposing to remove the existing patio and walkways and replace it with a smaller patio to reduce the overall hardcover. The reduction will result in an improved condition compared to what is existing on the site. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The construction of a patio 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 #2012-09, dated July 17, 2012, prepared by Ashley Mellgren, et al., is incorporated herein. DECISION "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves Planning Case #2012-09 for a 25-foot variance to the Shoreland Management Setback for the reconstruction of a patio on property zoned Single -Family Residential (RSF)." 2012. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments this 17th day of July, CITY OF CHANHASSEN M Chairman CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION VLtAJt Applicant Name and Address: l7ti C. c7c,�Tk si-ree+ 14 vim,^ Co2ye ILL-44i is 1"17 6:C'o7-7 Contact: k Lgiya-- Phonebsl-244f- 3y41 Fax:GSI-LK. - 1i3Li Email: Planning Case Nocwo--0 1 Name and Address: C e 5 S Contact: L� L ; eL h,a, e Phone:qu-qI-s-24uZ Fax: Email: t Ilk Q 61/ , Cc fvl 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) i Variance (VAR) _ UU Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment i Notification Sign $200 (City to install and remove) X E ow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" $50 UP/SPR/VACNAR/WAP/Metes & Bounds - $450 Minor SUB q0_ TOTAL FEE$ 4-so Chta_ ag735 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 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: i G1 LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PI TOTAL ACREAGE: WETLANDS PRESENT: L Ur t YES NO PRESENTZONING: �L°S i rJl[!1 i i q1 REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: yk kaui c e v 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. ignature of Applicant Date Signature of Fee Owner Date g:\plan\forms\dcvelopment review application.doc SCANNED PROJECT NAME: V i e\ LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND TOTAL ACREAGE: S % WETLANDS PRESENT: C a YES k NO PRESENT ZONING: t U 1 REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: 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. -i his 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. 4��l�� 6I5 � ( ), signature of Applicant Date Signature of Fee Owner Date "ipinn\forms\development review application.doc SCANNED PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PIDc TOTAL ACREAGE: — -- — -- wETLANDS PRESENT: YES NO PRESENT ZONING: — REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: � -- REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: -- FOR SITE PLANE REVIEW Include number of ois[ng employsc-�: a: d new employees: be olmatiOn This application mush beacompleted le City full and het Provisions, r clearlyBeforPrints land must On youpshoul d c`inlferf with the and plans required by ppfing application. planning Department to determine the specicic ordinance and procedural requEretnenis appecatde to your app . A deteraynation of completeness of i€3e appfication shall be made vrithin t S business clays Of application submittai. A wriden notice of application deficiencies shall tag mall d to the applicant within 15 business dads of applicat ont. p Yr This is to certity that I am maid, application for the de scr bed act on by the Cry and that € am responsible for wm nq vith all City requirements v�lth regard to this request. This app6 atiott should ba processed in city, name and I P of patty vehom the City should cenisci regarding any matter pertairsing fc tills application. '. have attavhed a co of oof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase i greernent), or t am the authorized person I o make Y,,is application and be fee ov.�ner has also signed tills appicadon. I will Keep myself Informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the pragress of this application- € %rher understand that additional fees may be charged for (x*nsuling fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any auLtorizatlon to proceed vrrth the study. The e rigcurnants and information': have sunc:ntteo are true and car to `Jie best of my knowledge, Date 'Slgnature o Applicant Signature of Fee Otener -- Date — SCANNED g;Mykan'ttwxs'vsxvc'apmeat W"wv; apphi ie !. T For property at: 6645 Horseshoe Curve Chanhassen MN SS317 I am proposing the following for site improvement: The homeowners contacted me to take a look at their site because of erosion issues, difficulties maintaining the steep hill off the back of the house, a failing staircase, and a failing flagstone patio. The homeowners moved into the house as it is currently and have made no changes to the existing landscape. once I looked at the site I noticed the issues my homeowners mentioned along with existing hardcover concerns, as well as existing tree concerns. After going through everything I came up with this plan to improve the conditions of the lot by trying to stop erosion of the hillside, maintaining the care of the existing trees and general nature of the lot. This is being done by the following. 1. Problem: • Homeowner is having difficulty maintaining the erosion of the hillside out of the back of the house due to the drastic elevation change and shade provided by the existing mature trees. There is existing grass and some edging with plantings but due to the elevation change along with shade from existing trees and tree roots being exposed nothing is growing and soil continues to erode down the hill to the lake. Solution: • Propose building a 4'tall retaining wall to hold up the upper level of the property as well as cutting down of the hillside to level out the lower part of the hill to stop erosion for continuing to occur. 2. Problem: • Access to lower level of the yard and the lake. There are existing stairs on site now that are much farther toward the lake that are falling apart and are unsafe and unusable in their current condition. Solution: • Build in with the boulder wall a staircase that does not go so far into the yard that is tied into the wall with 1' wide Chilton stairs to provide a save and easy way to get to the lake. 3. Problem: • large uneven broken down patio along with small (not to code) landing from back door to the existing patio. Very dense shade and dead soil. Solution: • Replace existing stoop with small deck to lower to new paver patio to replace the existing stone patio. Provide new soil and plantings. Will shrink the existing hardcover and provide small sitting area in dead space and allow access from back door to the yard. SCANNED The property was purchased as it is now. As the property sits right now there is major runoff and erosion happening due to the steep slope off the back of the house and the existing mature trees that provide shade and a natural look from both the lake and the house. There is an existing large broken up patio with stairs that go into the home along with a very large broken down staircase from the upper yard into the lower yard. By doing this landscape we are trying to reduce the runoff and erosion along with possible pollution being carried into the lake, maintain the health of the existing trees, allow for easer maintenance of the property, and reduce the existing hardcover. Keeping in mind we are not changing the look of the property and are preserving it by leveling the yard keeping the tree roots buried and providing access from the house to the lake. This is not to save money for the property owners. It is to maintain the property, help keep the lake clean, provide a safe environment, and protect the trees and look of the natural surroundings. SCANNED M511xcC ,:OHs $GRYfY.q SOUTHVIEW DESIGN Pg 1 o a! CrrceCmxY.AW Pryeny Abhef:N Ibtlmur4:3P1e oFb Elevm E.Ha a is LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVEYORS REGISM`FL R THE LAM OF STAn OF MM1E5pTA Ww 1-A— f vxv�.wAfH 3uraryars C�lrrtifirttte HORSEHOE CARVE INVOICE NO. gout F.B.NO. 1060.31 SCALE: l'. 3V •0.s O Onrw Murm� . od.. E 5TING HARDCOVER R ,Ovm 3104s,ft Pp Ic 461 sg.R Garage 520sg.R Shed BOsg.R Omewry 4343 x1.R Hagxau 1293 aq.R C.orc+ef 154 egR TOW Har4ocr = 10555 sq.R nry d Parcel = 37340 eg.R Percentage a Hardcrner — 26 2T.6 Ia 5, RF.ARRANGMENS OF L Rl PLEASANT VIEW C C., M.. Pn. crh.wmsu mu.n .. Rwn Fw a vmv v Y6mam nve.a eEava � vnar.a.r avR,p.av+m. v iaRH+.m vay.e a •. v Boa. vRamt+wv4am.�e M1... Ala�ebl.J sH..Iv vier R. Rv. a ee we a E�HSN s.�.,.aea iae.ya wmia ELM PR�os�s�� SOUTHVIEW DESIGN v�vsmy kv..a.s o�wwy Ame.:ee m.k�w:sp�lam �wlm Ekreti � w. LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVEYORS 0.EGISlEAEp UNppITiEUM3OFSTAIEOFNINNESQfA sM (F11Yf01f0 1l4SYv 90 3urutiJars C�ieriifirair HOR5EHOE CORVE IM OICE NO. �1 F.B.NO. 1060.I1 SCALE I"- w 0 . O u�wkeles�� rr ryk �I MSPH6 HARDCOVER Re -.darn 3/6sq.ft cx 461 x/ C >)e 520 aq.& SMd 3.,..R 0^ve 12 3 sq.k Po4stme 1154 s . k foriaett 110555 total Haf4 - 10555 e4.k P. d Pawl H 37340 9, Pceenfa9e d Ha � - 28.21R PROPOSPO HARLCOVER Reside re 3/045.k Ppelies 4G/ sq.R Ga.a3e 520 aq.ft Slid BO aq Ornnrey 4943 �.t Conoete 426a R 426 sq.R totallHsrdca.er m 9659.& Area of P rcd 31340,sq2 Percenvge a! Hardcover - 25.9!6 W 5, RF.ARRANGMENT OF Wn W PLEASANT VIEW C.O , Nimerou Ta olY eammb Nv»n an /mn {✓as > recw0 w FPnrubi Pmwea p ma IVNY tlxI Ma W^. spxMxb^.arcOM ess wtt.�Mmew um m, Bm pipvHt�i rq M I ae a 61/ lbrvl YN EUMwuvYMYWS GIeSW of MnmMa. Suvs/N pY fY yyMLp AfL CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on July 5, 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 6645 Horseshoe Curve Variance —Planning Case 2012-09 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 ofSi.�ly , 2012. I Not Pub is Kate J. Enge and Deputy erk KIM T. MEUWISSEN Notary Public -Minnesota My Cmimwion F�irM JY1 al. 2015 Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: ' Tuesday, July 17, 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 a variance to allow for the reconstruction of a patio Proposal: on property located in the Shoreland Management Setback and Single Family Residential Zoning District RSF Applicant: Josh Koller, Southview Design Property 6645 Horseshoe Curve Location: A location map is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing through the following steps: 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/2012-09. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Ashley Mellgren Questions & by email at amellorenOci.chanhassen.mn.us or by phone at Comments: 952-227-1132. 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 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 any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council, If you wish to have somethin to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. Date & Time: Tuesday, July 17, 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 a variance to allow for the reconstruction of a patio Proposal: on property located in the Shoreland Management Setback and Single Family Residential Zoning District RSF Applicant: Josh Koller, Southview Design Property 6645 Horseshoe Curve 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/2012-09. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Ashley Mellgren by email at amellgrenCdci.chanhassen.mn.us or by phone at Questions & 952-227-1132. 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, 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 reportand a recommendation, The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as apart 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 lake 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. ANDREW J & LINDA M HOFMEISTER ANDREW T K ALLER CHARLES F LEINBERGER JR 6653 MERRY PL 6661 HORSESHOE CURV 6655 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4607 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 DAVID W & BEVERLY J KOPISCHKE 6675 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 HAROLD G & KATHRYN M DAHL 6631 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 LADD R & SUSAN M CONRAD 6625 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 NICHOLAS J VASSALLO 6669 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 RICHARD R & KATHLEEN E PECK 6690 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9501 DIETRICH S HAAR 6651 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 JOHN M & SANDRA L CUNNINGHAM 6665 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 MICHAEL E & GLORIA LYNCH 6630 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 PAUL N GRANOS 6663 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 ROBERT L & ELVA HANSEN 6620 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 DORIS A ROCKWELL 6677 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 JOSEPH M & MARGERY M PFANKUCH 6611 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 MICHAEL J & SHERRY WEIS 6660 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 PHILIP O & LUDMILLA J ISAACSON 6633 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 SCOTT A GAMBLE 6640 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 STEPHEN J & JEANNIE L WANEK STEVEN M GULLICKSON TIMOTHY J FIELDHOUSE 6615 HORSESHOE CURV 6613 HORSESHOE CURV 6645 HORSESHOE CURV CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9526 noa®!me yann,vR, SOLrrHVIEW DESIGN STY YRY Y V /Y. 1, iwrY 114 Rip L. O�w6y',liroa 11R�AY�Ytl tlwv�CYRIYr31 1111, ��! yiRi�iRR�Yi�Re.CY1e � RY./�•t11)YR 41414_�Jil �Jro.n gv yy,/ LAND SURVEYORS RHi6iYRm UImO T1f"M.6 An MYMMEY 1 ururgors Errtifiratr H0R5EH0E CURVE d=23.&# JSCALE T= 30' • rr.•... r.r..n Y �G P vlz PMROCov" Resk*. 9104 ".ft Porches 461 ".a 6sre3e 520 sq.R 0 e0sq.ft ftg 12 3 "A rLrproee I154 N R Cov+em /10 55 i /fFd =-/0555sq.R Mu dPrrf=373A0-2 re,l-ss�e d n+tiw.�. - ze.zn PROPC1 W FARDCOVM Resderre 3/0esq.ft PeMres 46/ aq.R 6rA9e 520eq.ft 5M 60MA Dr---y 19e93q.ft CaxsMe l54sq./t Prop. PX 426eq.R Td IWdcorrr - 96A9 sq.R A d P: - 37340 sq.4 Peroeefye d PlArdewer - 25.9R 10 5, REARRANGW..W OF 1,0T m M,FASAN VIRW C Cty, My m pe+weYr rA�A Iw�KKpM.4WJm vn[anrovv�E Wrry viEs ^M iRtl W VA1riq M i Rn. M' lYve1 W 9vwyv vi4' K Yn d K 9YY d YrtrtY. 8urrytl K 1.1 p �dluR AI? YYIYR►fRRI 2ofZ.-of I( Du nuk roe, d C:7CVA 'RVt 1\4�l v Puff down a vlumvfv- a �AVW U tb Y coy),� Ci - . �Im -C-IMe G�ecl� appl�cr�ho� 1ekcxro.a - Z mtv5 AAAAy v km -ptyu �- � 4v\-g- MLcl f ov do -MV -Ct �c oot Po-pt ov N�Z- City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 Date: June 18, 2012 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department Review Response Deadline: July 3, 2012 By: Ashley Mellgren, Planning Intern 952-227-1132 amelleren(a,ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Request for a variance to allow for the reconstruction of a patio located in the Shoreland Management Setback on a property zoned Single Family Residential (RSF) located at 6645 Horseshoe Curve. Applicant: Josh Koller, Southview Design. Owner: Carol Fieldhouse. Planning Case: 2012-09 PID: 25-6400040 The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on June 15, 2012. The 60-day review period ends August 14. 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 July 17. 0012 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than July 3, 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 f. Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 3. MN Dept. of Transportation 4. MN Dept. of Natural Resources -Jack Gleason 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 6. U.S. Fish & Wildlife 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 (Qwest or Sprint/United) 10. Electric Company (Xcel Energy or MN Valley) 11. Mediacom 12. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco SCANNED LOCATION MAP 6645 Horseshoe Curve Variance Request Planning Case 2012-09 I CITY OF CHANHASSEN P O BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 06/19/2012 2:44 PM Receipt No. 00191014 CLERK: AshleyM PAYEE: Southview Design Inc 1875 50th Street E Inver Grove Heights MN 55077- Planning Case 2012-09 ------------------------------------------------------- Use & Variance 200.00 Sign Rent 200.00 Recording Fees 50.00 Total Cash Check 28835 Change 450.00 0.00 450.00 0.00 SCANNED 6645 HORSESHOE CURVE VARIANCE - PLANNING CASE 2012-09 $200.00 Variance $200.00 Notification Sign $50.00 Recording Escrow $450.00 TOTAL $450.00 Less Check #28835 from Southview Design $0.00 BALANCE SCANNED