CAS-13_2017-13 VARIANCE FOR 2ND DRIVEWAYThomas J. Campbell
Roger N. Knutson
Elliott B. Knetsch
Joel J. jamnik
Andrea McDowell Poehler
Soren M. Mattick
John F. Kelly
Henry A. Schaeffer, III
Alina Schwartz
Shana N. Conklin
Amy B. Schutt
James J. Monge, III
Jerome M. Porter
Kurt S. Fischer
Matthew K. Brokl
Grand Oak Office Center 1
860 Blue Gentian Road
Suite 290, Fagan, MN 55121
651-452-3000
Fax 651-234-6237
waw.ck-law.mm
Ij- i3
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
Professional Association
September 28, 2017
Ms. Jenny Potter
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: Miscellaneous Recorded Document
Dear Ms. Potter:
Please find enclosed, for the City's files, the following documents which have been
recorded with Carver County:
1. Conditional Use Permit #2015-16 recorded August 31, 2017 as document
number A651145;
2. Conditional Use Permit #2016-13 recorded August 31, 2017 as document
number A651146;
3. Variance 2016-13 recorded August 31, 2017 as document number A651147;
4. Variance 2017-13 recorded August 30, 2017 as document number A651037;
and
5. Variance 2017-09 recorded August 30 2017 as document number A651038;
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
Professional Association
Jean son, Legal Assistant
/jmo
Enclosures
190708v6
Document No. A651037
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Recorded on -August 30, 2017 2:12 PM
Fee-. $46.00
111111 11111111Ili David Frischmon
65103; County Recorder
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
VARIANCE 2017-13
1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby
grants the following variance:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance request to allow
for a second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane
2. Prone . The variance is for a property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County,
Minnesota, and legally described as Lot 6 Minnewashta Park.
3. Conditions. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions:
a. The applicant must apply for and receive a driveway permit.
b. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around existing trees prior to any
construction activities.
c. Double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any excavation of
the site.
d. The driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction
requirements/details as well as the requirements in City Code Section 20-122 Access
and Driveways.
e. The driveway shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete, or paver surface.
f. As stipulated by City Code Section 20-977 the detached garage may not be used to
operate or store material for a home occupation.
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.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
(ss
COUNTY OF CARVER )
AiLtr1
CITY OF CHANNHASSEN
BY:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
K
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this*day of ,
2017 by Denny Laufenburger, Mayor and Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City oflefianhassen,
a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to authority granted
by its City Council.
NOTARY PUBL
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
2
I KIMry MEUWne EN
'a
�...q
i-. � Notary Public -Minnesota
0 y'My co nisab Expires Jan 31, 2020
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER & HENNEPIN
COUNTIES
NOTICE OF PUBLIC
HEARING
PLANNING CASE NO, 2017-13
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN
that the Chanhassen Planning
Commission will hold a public
hearing on Tuesday, June, 20,
2017 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
for a second driveway on property
zoned single family residential
RSF) and located at 2740 Orchard
Lane. Applicant/Owner: Faye
Ean rath.
A plan showing the location
of the proposal is available
for public review on the city's
web site at wwwci.chanhassen.
mn.us/2017-13 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.
MacKenzie Walters
Email: mwatters@
ci.chanhassen.mmus
Phone: 952-227-1132
(Published in the Chanhassen
Pillager on Thursday, June 8,
2017: No. 4470)
Affidavit of Publication
Southwest Newspapers
State of Minnesota)
)SS.
County of Carver )
Laurie A. Hartmann, being duly sworn, on oath says that she is the publisher or the authorized
agent of the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Vil-
lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows:
(A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal
newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331 A.02, 331 A.07, and other applicable laws, as
amended. —7
(B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No.
was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said
Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of
the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both
inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition
and publication of the Notice:
abcdefghijklmnopgrstuvwxyz
Laurie A. Hartmann
Subscribed and sworn before me on
117
fWyNx;WMMSNS�lu
t . '. EXP:'P.ESOtf31l'8
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 ................................. $3120 per column inch
Rate actually charged for the above matter...............................................$12.59 per column inch
scANNEO
i�-G
Chanhassen Planning Commission — June 20, 2017
4. The developer shall not encroach into the Bluff Creek Primary Zone.
5. The developer shall comply with the with the 40 foot primary zone setback and preserve or
create a 20 foot buffer from the primary zone.
6. The buffer will be required to have a vegetation management plan and soil amendments.
7. The plans shall be revised to remove any structure in the BCOD.
Commissioners Undestad, Randall and Madsen voted in favor. Commissioners Aller,
Yusuf, Tietz and Weick voted in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 3 to 4.
Undestad moved, Randall seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission
recommends the City Council approve the Variance to encroach, not to exceed 1.3 acres,
into the primary zone and required buffer for the construction of the development; and
adopts the amended Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Commissioners Undestad,
Randall and Madsen voted in favor. Commissioners Aller, Yusuf, Tietz and Weick voted
in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 3 to 4.
Aller: The motion does not carry. And that finishes Avienda at this point in time and they'll of
course be back after their consideration with the City Council on future items. Before you go
gentlemen I want to thank you again for your presentations and for your continued efforts in
working with the City and we look forward to seeing you as the project progresses.
Darren Lazan: Thanks for your time.
Mark Nordland: Thank you very much.
PUBLIC HEARING:
2740 ORCHARD LAND: REOUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR A SECOND DRIVEWAY
ON PROPERTY ZONED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL tRSF1 AND LOCATED AT
2740 ORCHARD LANE. APPLICANT/OWNER: FAYE KAMRATH.
Walters: Alrighty whenever you're ready.
Aller: We're ready.
Walters: So this is Planning Case 2017-13, 2740 Orchard Lane variance. It will go if appealed
before the City Council on the I e. It's the applicant and owner Faye Kamrath is proposing a
second driveway access for her property. The property is zoned Residential Single Family and I
have the minimum criteria for that zoning standard up here. 15,000 square foot lot, 30 foot front
yard setback, 10 foot side yard. It needs to have a 40 foot setback from the Manage 2 wetland to
the north of the property. It's limited to 25 percent hard cover and our code limits every
27
Chanhassen Planning Commission — June 20, 2017
residential property to a single driveway access. This parcel is about 4.4 acres and currently has
about 2.6 percent impervious surface. This right here is a picture of the site conditions. As you
can see the rear of the property has a very large wetland. There is a rental, a house that is
currently being rented out to a tenant here which is served by an existing gravel driveway. There
is no garage on the house and then there's a detached garage that is being used for storage by the
property's owner. Currently it's accessed by driving over the grass which has basically created a
dirt way and the variance is to allow them to have a paved driveway to better access that
detached garage. It is within the shoreland overlay district of Lake Minnewashta and we had
approved the detached garage to be built without a driveway in 2013. The applicant is proposing
the second driveway. One of the big reasons they're asking for it is because it would result in a
lot less impervious surface for the lot. They do have because it's such a large property they
could connect the proposed garage to the existing gravel driveway. Doing so would require at
least 3,800 square feet of impervious surface. A second driveway access would require a 1,440
square feet of impervious surface. The other factor to consider is this is a very large property. It
has about 350 feet of lot frontage. That allows for quite a bit of space between the existing
driveway and the proposed driveway. I believe it actually works out to 215 feet separation
between the existing gravel driveway and the proposed second driveway so typically you know
you have a minimum 90 foot frontage in single family lots so the gap would be larger than you'd
see generally between driveways in this district. The alternative of building a frontage style road
paralleling Orchard Lane would have a larger visual impact on the neighborhood so they are
proposing constructing a 32 by 30 foot apron and serving it by a 30 foot by 16 foot driveway.
The area here in the right-of-way does not count towards the property hard cover and again that
would be 1,440 square feet. So staff looked it over. It's indisputable that it would result in
significantly less impervious surface and less stormwater runoff possibly being directed into the
wetland. Just for fun I sketched out two alternatives that they could do that meet code.
Alternative 1 as I mentioned ended up being at 3,828 square feet of impervious surface.
Alternative 2 looping behind the house past 5,000 square feet of impervious surface so it would
have a lot less impact in terms of stormwater generation to do the second driveway. As
mentioned the main reason we restrict the amount of number of driveway accesses is to create a
situation where you have lots of cars entering in a short space. There is a lot of spacing between
the comprehensive plan's guidelines are 40 feet of spacing. At 215 it's well in excess of that.
Looking around at the neighborhood we found 4 other properties starred here within 500 feet that
also have a second driveway access. Those are all legal non-conforming's so because it seems to
comply with the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan would result in substantially less
impervious surface being constructed and we don't believe that the spacing would create any
safety issues, as well as having less of a visual impact on the character of the neighborhood staff
does support this variance request. I would be happy to take any questions at this time.
Aller: Can you tell us what if any way the use of the garage would have on our deliberations?
Walters: We were contacted as was in the staff report by resident's concern that the garage was
being used to run a home occupation. That would not be allowed by city code. The applicant
has been informed of this. They have stated that it is not being used for that purpose. That it's
28
Chanhassen Planning Commission — June 20, 2017
all personal storage. Staff is recommending just to make certain it's clear that a condition be
placed that the property not be used for a home occupation. But ultimately the property's
compliance with that aspect of the code is viewed as a separate issue from the variance. Staff
will enforce city code whether this variance is granted or not and in neither event this property
would not be allowed to have a home occupation run out of the garage.
Aller: And that same result would be utilized with any of the other properties that have legal
non -conforming uses within 500 feet for instance if there was a business being run out of there.
It would not be permitted and a neighbor could potentially bring that to the City's attention and
then the City would have to act.
Walters: Yep, just like any property in the city whether they have one driveway or two
driveways. If I get a call saying there's a home occupation we investigate. We do our due
diligence and if we find out that there's reason to believe there is one we work with the property
owner to bring it into compliance. Yep.
Aller: Thank you. Any additional questions of staff at this point in time?
Weick: When you say home occupation you mean a business out of the home?
Walters: Yeah. So without going too deep into the weeds the city code does not allow any type
of business to be run out of a detached accessory structure so no garages. It doesn't matter
where, the only exception are existing agricultural uses.
Weick: I was just confused by that terminology. I'd never seen that before.
Walters: Yep.
Aller: Great, okay. We'll move on. If the applicant would like to come forward and make a
presentation that would be great. If you could step up and state your name and address for the
record sir and then tell us about your project.
Jeff Kamrath: Okay. I'm Jeff Kamrath. I live at 2731 Orchard Lane which is across the road
from this piece of property. My wife actually owns the property. We bought the property
approximately 10 years ago. The lady who lived there was a 86 year old widow. The property
had gone into quite a state of disrepair. It was very over grown with brush and trees and
buckthorn. We spent 2 years cleaning up the property. Cleaning up the brush. Mitigated a lot of
buckthorn that's in the woods on the property. We also went ahead and did the buckthorn along
Sandpiper Trail even though it's not our property. It enhanced the appearance of the property so
we cleaned that up as well. My wife has planted many gardens there and improved a lot of the
landscaping with shrubs and we view it as kind of a unique piece of property. It's a large piece
of property. It's very visible because it's the biggest piece of property when you come into the
neighborhood so we've tried to be good neighbors and keep it up and improve it and make it
F
Chanhassen Planning Commission —June 20, 2017
look well. We've gotten many comments from other neighbors along that line that appreciate
what we've done here. I built the garage 4 years ago with the full understanding that you know
we would not be allowed to have a second driveway. We've just been driving across the grass
and thus created basically a dirt road to the garage is what's happened. The issue of the
driveway actually came up, the road contractor who's doing the streets there needed a place to
store materials and to store equipment. It was very convenient for him because we have a large
piece of property and he said if we would allow him to do that he would put a driveway in for us
so that's why we're applying for the variance. Trying to take advantage of an opportunity here
to be very truthful about that so. But the driveway seems to fit in with the neighborhood. It
doesn't seem to create any issues that staff has found and again it's a much better option than try
to build a driveway from all the way across from the east side of the property and we just think it
would enhance the property. Enhance it's appearance and enhance the use of the property for us.
Aller: Thank you. Any questions of the applicant? Seeing none thank you sir.
Jeff Kamrath: Thank you.
Aller: Okay at this point in time I'll open up the public hearing portion of this item so again this
is an opportunity for any individual that's present to come forward and state their position or ask
questions or comment on the matter before us. Seeing no one come forward I will close the
public hearing. Open it up for commissioner comments.
Tietz: Well I understand the situation. I tried to bike down that road the other day and almost
had to walk my bike down the road so I understand the situation over there but it seems like a
good solution.
Aller: Any other comments? Questions? Again thank you for the report. It's very clear and
again for those at home these reports that we receive are on the website so feel free to go take a
look at them. With that I'll entertain a motion.
Madsen: I'll make a motion.
Aller: Commissioner Madsen.
Madsen: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance request to
allow for a second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane subject to the conditions of approval
and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision.
Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Yusuf. Second.
30
Chanhassen Planning Commission — June 20, 2017
Aller: Having a motion and a second, any further discussion? Hearing none I'll put the matter to
a vote.
Madsen moved, Yusuf seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments
approves a variance request to allow for a second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane,
subject to the following conditions and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decision:
1. The applicant must apply for and receive a driveway permit.
2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around existing trees prior to any construction
activities.
3. Double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any excavation of the
site.
4. The driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction
requirements/details as well as the requirements in City Code Section 20-122 Access and
Driveways.
5. The driveway shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete or paver surface.
6. As stipulated by City Code Section 20-977 the detached garage may not be use to operate
or store material for a home occupation.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
Aller: Okay we have two other items coming before us for public hearing. With the
commissioners permission I'd like to kind of take a poll and see who's here on what and try to
deal with the one with the biggest impact first or second, whichever way we'd like to do it so by
a raise of hands those individual who are here for item 2, West Park. I have 2, 4, 6, 7. And item
3, the Venue at Aldi. 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Probably just take them as is. There doesn't seem to be
a big significant difference. Is staff ready to go with item 2 which is West Park?
PUBLIC HEARING:
WEST PARK, 8601 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD: REZONING, SITE PLAN
REVIEW, SUBDIVISION, AND VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH VARIANCES
ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AND SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RSF) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN 82 UNIT TOWNHOME
DEVELOPMENT AND LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF WATERS EDGE DRIVE, WEST
OF GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD, NORTH OF HIGHWAY 212 AND BISECTED BY
LAKE SUSAN DRIVE. APPLICANT: PULTE HOMES. OWNER: BRIAN
KLINGELHUTZ.
31
June 26, 2017
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Chanhassen is a Community for Life- Providing forToday and Planning forTomorrow
Faye Kamrath
2731 Orchard Lane
Excelsior, MN 55331
Re: Variance -2nd Driveway Access (2740 Orchard Lane)
Dear Ms. Kamrath,
This letter is to formally notify you that on June 20, 2017, the Chanhassen Planning Commission
voted to approve the following motion:
"The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance request to allow for a
second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane, subject to the conditions of approval and adopts
the attached Findings of Facts and Decisions."
The conditions of the variance are as follows:
1. The applicant must apply for and receive a driveway permit.
2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around existing trees prior to any
construction activities.
Double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any excavation of
the site.
4. The driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction
requirements/details as well as the requirements in City Code Section 20-122 Access
and Driveways.
5. The driveway shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete, or paver surface.
6. As stipulated by City Code Section 20-977 the detached garage may not be used to
operate or store material for a home occupation.
SCANNED
PH 952.227.1100 • wwwAchanhassen.mn.us • FX 952.227.1110
7700 MARKET BOULEVARD • PO BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN • MINNESOTA 55317
Planning Commission
2740 Orchard Lane - Variance -2°d Driveway Access — Planning Case 2017-13
June 26, 2017
Page 2 of 2
The variance is valid for one year from the approval date. The conditions placed on the variance
must be met by June 20, 2018. If you have any questions, please contact meat 952-227-1132 or
by email at mwaltersOci.chanhassen.mn.us.
Sincerely,
MacKenzie Walters
Assistant Planner
c: Building File
G\PL.AN\2017 Planning Cases\17-13 2740 Grohud Lane - Variance\Approval Luer 1 17-13.dm
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
P 0 BOX 147
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
05/30/2017 11:45 AM
Receipt No. 00348468
CLERK: AshleyM
PAYEE: Faye & Jeffrey Kamrath
2731 Orchard Lane
Excelsior MN 55331-
2740 Orchard Lane Planning Case 2017-13
-------------------------------------------------------
Variance
200.00
Sign Rent
200.00
Recording Fees
50.00
GIS List
198.00
Total
Cash
Check 5319
Change
648.00
0.00
648.00
0.00
0-/3
SCANNcO
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
(APPROVAL)
IN RE:
Application of Faye Kamrath for a variance request to allow for a second driveway access on a
property zoned Single Family Residential District (RSF)-Planning Case 2017-013.
On June 20, 2017, 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:
F SDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Single -Family Residential District (RSF).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density.
3. The legal description of the property is:
Lot 6 Minnewashta Park
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 City Code limits residential lots to one driveway access to prevent a dense
clustering of driveways which could negatively impact traffic, safety, and the viewscape
of residential neighborhoods. Similarly, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan specifies that there
should be at least 40 feet between driveway accesses. Due to the property's
approximately 350 feet of frontage along Orchard Lane and the proposed 200 plus foot
spacing between the existing and proposed driveway, allowing a second driveway would
not run counter to the intent of Chapter 20 and would be in line with the 2030
Comprehensive Plan guidelines.
Additionally, Chapter 20 places limits on the amount of impervious surface allowed on
residential lots in order to reduce stormwater generation and protect the City's water
resources. While both the proposed driveway and a driveway conforming to City Code
would be under the property's 25 percent impervious surface limit, granting a variance
which has the effect of reducing the amount of impervious surface that will be installed
near a wetland is line with the intent of Chapter 20.
SCANNED
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 applicant could construct a driveway that complied with City Code;
however, the distance between the house and detached garage make a connecting
driveway impractical and excessively long. It is reasonable to request a second access in
lieu of a long driveway connection paralleling Orchard Lane.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The purpose of the variance is to allow access to the detached garage with a
minimum impact on the property, and is not based upon economic considerations.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The width of the property, placement of the original house, and presence of a
large wetland on the norther half of the property would have made it challenging to
construct a detached garage in a location readily serviceable by the existing driveway.
The applicant could have constructed the detached garage in a location more easily
connectable to the existing driveway.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: Four other properties within 500 feet also have two driveway accesses. Most
driveways in the area are located closer to each other than the proposed driveway is from
the existing driveway. Allow the detached garage to be accessed by a second driveway
would have a minimal impact on 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 #2017-13, dated June 20, 2017, prepared by MacKenzie Walters, is
incorporated herein.
DECISION
"The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance request to
allow for a second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant must apply for and receive a driveway permit.
2
2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around existing trees prior to any
construction activities.
3. Double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any excavation of
the site.
4. The driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction
requirements/details as well as the requirements in City Code Section 20-122 Access
and Driveways.
5. The driveway shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete, or paver surface.
6. As stipulated by City Code Section 20-977 the detached garage may not be used to
operate or store material for a home occupation."
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 20th day of June, 2017.
CITNYO •. ,i.,
s 1
Chairman
r
y �CITY OF CHANHASSEN
9NN ASS
PROPOSED MOTION:
PC DATE:
June 20, 2017
C
-2
CC DATE:
July 10, 2017
REVIEW DEADLINE: July 18, 2017
CASE #: 2017-13
BY: MW, SS, JS
"The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance request to allow for a
second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane, subject to the conditions of approval and adopts
the attached Findings of Facts and Decisions."
(Note: A motion for denial and appropriate findings of fact are also included at the end of the
report.)
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: 0W
The applicant is requesting a variance to create a second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane.
The property has a single gravel driveway on the southeast comer of the lot which serves the
house, but does not serve the detached garage located on the southwest corner of the property.
Currently the house is occupied by a renter and the detached garage is used by the property
owner for storage. The proposed second driveway would be located approximately 200 feet from
the existing driveway. This driveway would add approximately 1,440 square feet of impervious
surface to the property, whereas extending the existing driveway to connect to the detached
garage would increase the property's impervious surface by an estimated 3,800 square feet. A
variance is required because city ordinance limits residential lots to a single driveway access.
LOCATION: 2740 Orchard Lane
(PID 255150040)
APPLICANT: Faye Kamrath
2731 Orchard Lane
Excelsior, MN 55331
OWNER: Faye Kamrath
2731 Orchard Lane
Excelsior, MN 55331
PRESENT ZONING: RSF
2030 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density
ACREAGE: 4.4 acres DENSITY: NA
Planning Commission
2740 Orchard Lane — 2"a Driveway Variance
June 20, 2017
Page 2 of 8
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.
PROPOSAUSUMMARY
The applicant wishes to improve
access to the property's detached
garage. Currently the garage is
accessed by driving across the
lawn. This has caused the grass in
the area to die off which has
effectively created a dirt driveway
which is difficult to navigate when
the ground is wet.
The applicant proposes to improve
POFD y c
LOT 6 �i`l`��✓\
YAR 6116 \
WRiEMASHTA PARK
i"'yw 01
4. ce�t't z
+ 9 /
'Al61,
/
N
the situation by creating a second driveway. This driveway would be 82 feet long, including the
area in the right of way, and 16 feet wide, and would add about 1,440 square feet of impervious
surface to the property. It would be located approximately 210 feet from the property's existing
driveway. The driveway would be the only one accessing Orchard lane between Minnewashta
Woods Drive and Sandpiper Trail. It would be located about 145 feet from the intersection of
Orchard Lane and Sandpiper Trail.
The applicant has stated that it would be impractical to meet ordinance by connecting the
detached garage to the existing driveway because of the distance involved. A connecting
driveway would need to be around 240 feet long and would result in significantly more
impervious surface being constructed on the property. They also believe that the wetland located
on the property would require the connection to pass in front of the house and run parallel to
Orchard Lane, a configuration which would be detrimental to the neighborhood's aesthetics.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 1, General Provisions
Section 1-2, Rules of Construction and Definitions
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances
Chapter 20, Article VI. Wetland Protection
Chapter 20, Article VII. Shoreland Management District
Chapter 20, Article XII. "RSF" Single-family residential district
Planning Commission
2740 Orchard Lane — 2nd Driveway Variance
June 20, 2017
Page 3 of 8
Section 20-615. Lot requirements and setbacks.
Chapter 20, Article XXIV, Division 2, Parking and Loading
Section 20-1122. Access and Driveways
The original house was built in 1900.
On August 22, 2013, the city issued a building permit for a detached garage. The detached
garage was not connected to the existing driveway, and note was placed on survey indicating that
a driveway to the street was not allowed.
On May 25, 2017, staff was informed that a home occupation, namely a lawn care/landscaping
business, was being run from the detached garage at 2740 Orchard Lane. Staff followed up on
the complaint and determined that the property was being used to store lawn care equipment.
On May 30, 2017, staff sent a letter to the property owner informing them of the city's home
occupation ordinance and instructing them to ensure that the property was in compliance by
Friday, June 9, 2017.
On June 9, 2017, the property owner spoke with Construction Manger Ferraro and stated that the
building had been used to store lawn care equipment for use on their property and that no
business was being run from the property. The owner stated that the equipment has been
removed.
SITE CONDITIONS
The property is zoned Single -Family
Residential and is partially located within
the city's Shoreland Management District.
There is also a large Manage 2 Wetland
covering most of the northern half of the
property. This zoning district requires lots to
be a minimum of 20,000 square feet, have
front yard setbacks of 30 feet, rear yard
setbacks 30 feet, side yard setbacks of 10
feet, and limits hardcover to a maximum of
25 percent of lot area. Residential structures
are limited to 35 feet in height. As the lot was created before May 14, 2007, structures should be
set back at least 40 feet from the edge of the wetland.
The lot is 4.4 acres, and currently has 5,050 square feet of impervious surface resulting in 2.6
percent lot coverage. The proposed driveway expansion would increase this to 6,490 square feet
Planning Commission
2740 Orchard Lane — 2°d Driveway Variance
June 20, 2017
Page 4 of 8
of impervious resulting in 3.4 percent lot coverage. The property's existing buildings conform to
all applicable setbacks.
Currently, the house is occupied by a renter and the detached garage is being used for storage by
the property owner.
NEIGHBORHOOD
Minnewahsta Park
The plat for this area was recorded in November 1887. Numerous subdivisions have occurred on
the neighboring properties resulting in a predominance of third to half acre lots, with several
larger one to one and half acre lots mixed it. Within the neighborhood, the property in question is
unique both for its acreage and for the size of its wetland. All of the properties in this area are
zoned Single Family residential District.
Variances within 500 feet:
82-02 2730 Orchard Lane: Approved wetland fill and grading for construction of single family
home.
Non -conforming driveways (2 access) within 500 feet:
2630 Orchard Lane: 2 driveways on Orchard Ln, approximately 250 feet apart.
2641 Orchard Lane: 1 driveway on Orchard Ln and 1 driveway on Forest Ave, approximately 60
feet apart.
2660 Orchard Lane: 2 driveways on Orchard Ln, approximately 100 feet apart.
2821 Washta Bay Rd: 2 driveways on Washta Bay, approximately 80 feet apart.
ANALYSIS
One Driveway Requirement
The Single Family Residential District (RSF) has a minimum lot frontage of 90 feet. In order to
prevent an extremely high density of driveway accesses along roads serving these and other
residential districts Section 20-1122(10) limits each residential lot to a single driveway access.
Additionally the 2030 Comprehensive Plan espouses a standard spacing of at least 40 feet between
driveways. This ordinance and the comprehensive plan guidelines exist to prevent possible public
safety and traffic issues that can emerge from a high concentration of closely spaced driveways, and
also for aesthetic considerations involving insuring adequate greenspace and providing for an
appealing viewscape in residential neighborhoods.
Planning Commission
2740 Orchard Lane — 2°d Driveway Variance
June 20, 2017
Page 5 of 8
The property at 2740 Orchard Lane has approximately 350 feet of frontage along Orchard Lane, and
the start of the proposed second driveway is about 215 feet from the end of the existing driveway.
For reference, the distance between the existing driveway and the driveway of the property to the
east along Orchard Lane is roughly 90 feet. The applicant has stated that the distance between other
driveways along Orchard Lane ranges from 12 to 165 feet.
The property's house, located in the lot's southeast comer, is currently served by an existing gravel
driveway. The large frontage of the property means that a second driveway serving the detached
garage, located in the lot's southwest comer, could be accommodated without creating either the
public safety, traffic, or aesthetic issues that can stem from a dense collection of driveways. The
distance between the two driveways would be greater than is typical between the driveways of two
RSF parcels and would conform to the comprehensive plan's 40 -foot standard.
Impervious Surface
The applicant has a large property
and could connect the detached
garage to the existing driveway
without exceeding the property's 25
percent impervious surface limit;
however, this would require a
significantly longer driveway. Staff
sketched out two alternative
driveway paths that would meet
code. The first alternative travels in
front of the house and, assuming a
12 -foot wide 239 -foot long
driveway connecting to the
proposed 30 by 32 foot apron,
would have a surface area of 3,828
square feet. The second alterative
travels behind the house and,
assuming 12 -foot wide 337 -foot
long driveway connecting to the
proposed 30 by 32 apron, would
have a surface area of 5,004 square
ET
A`11Z
Y
Gl4iv
W 6
9 J Y
fi r
LOT r.
A•
t)n�
MM"ASHT PASA �•
£,A1� t nll
WAI
_
z�w
\P a�,3a; vo �' 'rhe
�az
i6.f o
ir9 au
wo•rt�
b.u. �avr
J71d g
u` Q ' 6ZA
feet. In contrast, the proposed driveway, a 16 -foot wide 30 -foot long driveway connecting to a 30 by
32 foot apron would have a surface area of 1,440 square feet.
Staffs alternative routes are conceptual, and it is likely that a less hardcover intensive route could
be created; however, any attempt to connect the detached garage to the existing driveway would
result in significantly more impervious surface than the proposed second driveway. Increased
impervious surface means increased stormwater runoff. Engineering staff supports this variance
Planning Commission
2740 Orchard Lane — 2nd Driveway Variance
June 20, 2017
Page 6 of 8
request as it the proposed second driveway's environmental impacts are less intense than the
impacts of a driveway meeting code.
Impact on Neighborhood
Using aerial photos to survey
properties within 500 feet of the
applicant staff found that 4 of the
67 properties had two driveway
accesses. Three of these
properties were located on
Orchard Lane, and the distance
between their two accesses
ranged between 100 feet and 60
feet. Generally, the distances
between the single driveway
accesses of two single family
homes is significantly less than
the 215 feet that would separate
the proposed driveway from the
existing driveway. For these
reasons staff does not believe that
granting this variance would negatively impact the veiwscape or character of the neighborhood.
The applicant has also noted that a driveway which complied with the ordinance would need to run
parallel with Orchard Lane for over 200 feet, creating the appearance of a frontage road. This
configuration would be out of character with other properties in the area, would likely have a larger
impact on the character of the neighborhood.
Concerns Over Home Occupation
Staff has been contacted by multiple residents who have expressed concern that this driveway will
be used to allow the intensification of a landscaping business that they believe is being operated
from the detached garage. Staff has sent a letter to the applicant informing them that the detached
garage cannot be used to conduct a home occupation and requesting that they clarify the use of the
structure by June 9, 2017.
Subsequently, the owner spoke with staff and stated that the garage was only being used to store
lawn care equipment for use on their property, and that the equipment has been removed. They have
stated that no business is being run from the property.
Staff views the variance request as separate from the potential for a code violation, and will work to
ensure the property is being used in a manner permitted by city code regardless of the outcome of
the variance case; however, in order to avoid confusion, staff is recommending that a condition of
Planning Commission
2740 Orchard Lane — 2"d Driveway Variance
June 20, 2017
Page 7of8
the variance be that the detached garage may not be used to store items related to or to conduct a
home occupation.
SUMMARY
The applicant wishes to install a second driveway on their property to provide access to their
detached garage. The applicant's current practice of driving over the grass has essentially created
a dirt driveway that is difficult to navigate in wet weather. The applicant could gain access to the
detached garage by connecting it to the house's existing garage; however, this would
significantly increase the amount of impervious surface on the property. The lot is question is a
large 4.4 -acre parcel with around 350 feet of frontage along Orchard Lane and the proposed
second driveway would be located 200 feet from the existing driveway.
Staff believes that the proposed second driveway will not negatively impact the surrounding
neighborhood, will not create safety or traffic issues, and will result in less impervious surface
and a smaller environmental impact than extending the existing driveway to serve the detached
garage.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the variance request to allow for a
second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant must apply for and receive a driveway permit.
2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around existing trees prior to any
construction activities.
3. Double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any excavation of
the site.
4. The driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction
requirements/details as well as the requirements in City Code Section 20-122 Access
and Driveways.
5. The driveway shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete, or paver surface.
6. As stipulated by City Code Section 20-977 the detached garage may not be used to
operate or store material for a home occupation.
Should the Planning Commission deny the variance request to intensify the nonconforming use,
it is recommended that the planning Commission adopt the following motion and attached
Finding of Fact and Decision:
Planning Commission
2740 Orchard Lane — 2aa Driveway Variance
June 20, 2017
Page 8 of 8
"The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies a variance request to allow for a
second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and
Decisions."
ATTACHMENTS
1. Finding of Fact and Decision Approval
2. Finding of Fact and Decision Denial
3. Development Review Application
4. Public Hearing Notice Mailing List
5. Engineering Comments
6. Environmental Resources Specialist Comments
7. Variance Document
GAPLAN\2017 Planning Cases\17-13 2740 Orchard Lane - Variance\PC Staff Report -2740 Orchard Lane.doc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
(APPROVAL)
IN RE:
Application of Faye Kamrath for a variance request to allow for a second driveway access on a
property zoned Single Family Residential District (RSF)-Planning Case 2017-013.
On June 20, 2017, 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 District (RSF).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density.
3. The legal description of the property is:
Lot 6 Minnewashta Park
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 City Code limits residential lots to one driveway access to prevent a dense
clustering of driveways which could negatively impact traffic, safety, and the viewscape
of residential neighborhoods. Similarly, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan specifies that there
should be at least 40 feet between driveway accesses. Due to the property's
approximately 350 feet of frontage along Orchard Lane and the proposed 200 plus foot
spacing between the existing and proposed driveway, allowing a second driveway would
not run counter to the intent of Chapter 20 and would be in line with the 2030
Comprehensive Plan guidelines.
Additionally, Chapter 20 places limits on the amount of impervious surface allowed on
residential lots in order to reduce stormwater generation and protect the City's water
resources. While both the proposed driveway and a driveway conforming to City Code
would be under the property's 25 percent impervious surface limit, granting a variance
which has the effect of reducing the amount of impervious surface that will be installed
near a wetland is line with the intent of Chapter 20.
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 applicant could construct a driveway that complied with City Code;
however, the distance between the house and detached garage make a connecting
driveway impractical and excessively long. It is reasonable to request a second access in
lieu of a long driveway connection paralleling Orchard Lane.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The purpose of the variance is to allow access to the detached garage with a
minimum impact on the property, and is not based upon economic considerations.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The width of the property, placement of the original house, and presence of a
large wetland on the norther half of the property would have made it challenging to
construct a detached garage in a location readily serviceable by the existing driveway.
The applicant could have constructed the detached garage in a location more easily
connectable to the existing driveway.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: Four other properties within 500 feet also have two driveway accesses. Most
driveways in the area are located closer to each other than the proposed driveway is from
the existing driveway. Allow the detached garage to be accessed by a second driveway
would have a minimal impact on 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 #2017-13, dated June 20, 2017, prepared by MacKenzie Walters, is
incorporated herein.
DECISION
"The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance request to
allow for a second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant must apply for and receive a driveway permit.
2
2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around existing trees prior to any
construction activities.
3. Double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any excavation of
the site.
4. The driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction
requirements/details as well as the requirements in City Code Section 20-122 Access
and Driveways.
5. The driveway shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete, or paver surface.
6. As stipulated by City Code Section 20-977 the detached garage may not be used to
operate or store material for a home occupation."
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 20th day of June, 2017.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
Chairman
ki
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
(DENIAL)
IN RE:
Application of Faye Kamrath for a variance request to allow for a second driveway access on a
property zoned Single Family Residential District (RSF)-Planning Case 2017-013.
On June 20, 2017, 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 District (RSF).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density.
3. The legal description of the property is:
Lot 6 Minnewashta Park
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: It is the intent of the City Code's one driveway per residential lot provision to
prevent the proliferation of driveway accesses within residential districts. Many
homeowners have both attached and detached garages, and the City requires that both be
served by a single access point. Allowing separate garages separate driveway access
would nm counter to intent of this chapter.
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 homeowner could either connect the detached garage to the existing
driveway or remove the existing driveway and construct a new driveway to service the
detached garage. Both of these alternatives would meet City Code without requiring a
variance.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The purpose of the variance is to provide driveway access to the detached
garage with the minimum possible increase to the lot's impervious surface; this is not an
economic consideration.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The property owner could have built the detached garage in a location that
would lend itself to an easy connection with the existing driveway.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: No other front yard detached garage within 500 feet is serviced by a second
driveway. This configuration creates a more agrarian aesthetic than is typical for 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 #2017-13, dated June 20, 2017, prepared by MacKenzie Walters, is
incorporated herein.
DECISION
"The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies a variance request to allow
for a second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane."
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 20th day of June, 2017.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
1W
Chairman
2
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CI�'� OF CgANgASSEN
Planning Division — 7700 Market Boulevard
Mailing Address— P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: (952) 227-13001 Fax: (952) 227-1110
A /�y APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Submittal Date: 151 m I) t PC Date: �1+ CC Date: � 1 Q 60 -Day Review Date:
r _
(Refer to the appropnate Application Checklist for required submittal Information that must accompany this application)
❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment ......................... $600
❑ Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers ..... $100
❑ Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
❑ Single -Family Residence................................$325
❑ All Others ......................................................... $425
❑ Interim Use Permit (IUP)
❑ In conjunction with Single -Family Residence.. $325
❑ All Others .........................................................$425
❑ Rezoning (REZ)
❑ Planned Unit Development(PUD)..................$750
❑ Minor Amendment to existing PUD.................$100
❑ All Others ......................................................... $500
❑ Sign Plan Review ........ ......................................$150
❑ Site Plan Review (SPR)
❑ Administrative ..................................................$100
❑ CommerciaVindustrialDistricts'......................$500
Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of [wilding area:
thousand square feet)
Include number of existing employees:
Include number of now employees:
❑ Residential Districts.........................................$500
Plus $5 per dwelling unit (_ units)
❑
Subdivision (SUB)
❑ Create 3 lots or less ........................................$300
❑ Create over 3 lots .......................$600 + $15 per lot
lots)
❑ Metes & Bounds (2 lots)..................................$300
❑ Consolidate Lots..............................................$150
❑ Lot Line Adjustment. ........................................
$150
❑ Final Plat ..........................................................$700
(Includes $450 escrow for attorney costs)'
'Additional escrow may be required for other applications
through the development contract.
❑
Vacation of Easements(Right-of-way (VAC)........
$300
(Additional recording fees may appy)
JK. Variance (VAR) ....................................................
$200
❑
Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)
❑ Single -Family Residence...............................$150
❑ All Others .......................................................
$275
❑
Zoning Appeal ......................................................
$100
❑
Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA).................
$500
uWnmF: When multiple applications are processed eoncurreMly,
the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
XNotification Sign (City to instar and remove)...................................................................................................................... $200
JEf Property Owners' List within 500' (city to generate after pre -application meeting) ............................. m A . $3 per address
LV
addresses)
❑ Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that apply) ......................................... ...................... 90 per document
El Conditional Use Permit Interim Use Permit ❑ Site Plan Agreement
2�eeetierr- K Variance ❑ Wetiand Alteration Permit
❑ Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) ❑ Easements( easements)
TOTAL FEET $WB.00
Description of Proposal:
i 1 o Luii
Property Address or Location: 0 ?YO Dir C N A /E t7 I A 6 %
Parcel I%,e uaqLegal Description: SiFf-lq&L t .# Tillkiw S40 (filif 20.r,1( It 013 ffil"MxrrAs
Total Acreage: _ Wetlands Present.) JaYes [I No 0)4M Ljl.�r P f 7
Present Zoning: Select One AES. N dhl _ I+STy) Requested Zoning: Select One
Present Land Use Designation: Select One Requested Land Use Designation: Select One
Existing Use of Propw.. I-lfal i I!, A h C t,m 1 A t Lt I. I I T D f T c t' R) ^; ; ^. (pin` 15 5 f ailc� !i 106
❑ Check box is separate narrative is attached.
Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant Information
APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as applicant, represent to have obtained
authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to
the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. If this application has not been signed by
the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. 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 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. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.
Name: Contact
Address: Phone:
City/State/Zip: Cell:
Email: Fax:
Signature: Date: _
PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, 1, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do,
authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those
conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hoarings or during the appeal periods. 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. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct -
Name: 94VI7 ;eAm 7jd Contact
Address:—']3) C I AliD J) tllf Phone:
City/State/Zip: r--A-e A t r}ra; M&I S%331 Cell:
Email: / Fax:
FK
Signature: Date: S-/9'/7
This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by
applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist
and confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and applicable procedural
requirements and fees.
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.
PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable)
Name:
Contact:
Address:
Phone:
CrtylState0p:
Cell:
Email:
Fax:
Section 4: Notification
Who should receive copies of staff reports?
Information
*Other Contact Information:
❑ Property Owner Via: ❑ Email [I Mailed Paper Copy
Name:
❑ Applicant Via: F] Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy
Address:
❑ Engineer Via: ❑ Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy
City/State/Zip:
❑ Other Via: ❑ Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy
Email:
INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your
device. PRINT FOk and deliver to city along with required
documents and payment. SUBMIT FOR., to send a digital
copy to the city for processing (required).
tIAVE FORM
PRINT FORM lillaYlT FORM
am requesting a variance to install a second driveway to a detached garage at 2740
Orchard Lane. Since there is an existing driveway servicing the house on the property, a
variance is required to allow installation of a second driveway to service the detached garage.
"he garage is used to store several classic cars as well as lawn and grounds maintenance
equipment and snow blowers. While not having a driveway did not seem, to be much of an issue
when we bulli the gauge, it since has become somewhat o: a problem.
The garage is currently accessed by driving over the lawn from the roadway, While this
initially worked, as more trips over the lawn have occurred, the grass has gradually been killed
resulting in an unsightly and difficult to use dirt road, especially during wet w6et•:,et =c±.: n
spring.
A. driveway from Orchard Lane to the garage would greatly enhance the accessibility to
the garage, eliminate the unsightly dirt road and yet blend in well with the property.
The proposed driveway would blend well with the aesthetics of the neighberi:eorl. The
proposed width of 16 feet corresponds with the other driveways. Other driveways on Orchard
Lane range in length from 60 feet to 120 feet in length. The proposed driveway is 82 feet long.
The distance between driveways on Orchard Lane varies from as little as 12 vct to 165
feet. The distance from the proposed driveway to the next nearest driveway is 205 feet. It will
be the only driveway on the block from Sandpiper Trail to Minnewashta Woods Drive.
The proposed driveway is 145 feet from the corner of Sandpiper Trail and Orchard Lane
allowing a reasonable distance for vehicles turning onto Orchard Lane and vehicles entering or
exiting the proposed driveway to safely react to each other.
I plan to install additional shrubbery, plants and !lowers near the proposed dn'veway so it
blends in well with the other landscaping on the property. I will assess how to best accomplish
that once the driveway has been installed
There are some difficulties in attempting to comply with the ordinance and installing z
driveway from the house driveway to the garage. The most significant issue is the distance
involved. A driveway from the house to the garage would be approximately 240 feet long, while
a driveway from Orchard Lane to the garage would be 82 feet. That would result in considerably
less hard pack.
The configuration of the property does not lend itself to installing a driveway from the
house to the garage in an aesthetically pleasing manner. Since the house is located on the end of
the property, and the garage at the opposite end, a driveway complying with the ordinance would
run the entire length of the property and parallel to Orchard Lane. Since there is a wetland
behind the house, the only feasible route would be across the front yard of the house. This would
create a frontage road appearance, much more obtrusive and certainly would not fit in with any
of the other properties on Orchard Lane, who all have more conventional driveways. It would
significantly detract from the current landscaping, the turn of the century ambiance of the
property, as well as restricting any future landscaping.
Granting a variance for a second driveway would do far less to alter the character of the
neighborhood than would a driveway in compliance with the ordinance.
We have grown very fond of the property and have spent considerable time upgrading the
house and improving the grounds. A variance for a second driveway would further enhance our
efforts to continue to improve what we consider a rather unique property.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on June
8, 2017, 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 hearing is to consider a
request for a variance for a second driveway on property zoned single family residential
(RSF) and located at 2740 Orchard Lane 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 '9 day of , 2017.
(IIA M
Notary Public
4
!Wl
Kim . Meuwissen, Deputy c'
' '?� =Public-Minnesota
ER
aM020
Notice of Public Hearing
Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting
Date & Time:
Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. This hearing may not start until
later in the evening, depending on the order of theagenda.
Location:
City Hall Council Chambers 7700 Market Blvd.
Proposal:
To consider a request for a variance for a second driveway on
property zoned single family residential RSF .
Applicant:
Faye Kamrath
Property
2740 Orchard Lane
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/2017-13. If you wish to talk to
someone about this project, please contact MacKenzie
Questions &
Walters by email at mwalters(cDci.chanhassen.mn.us or by
Comments:
phone at 952-227-1132. If you choose to submit written
Comments:
comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in
advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the
Commission. The staff report for this item will be available
online on the project web site listed above the Thursday
prior to the Planning Commission meeting.
NEW! Sign up to receive email and/or text notifications when meeting agendas,
packets, minutes and videos are uploaded to the city's website. Go to
www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/notifyme to sign u I
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 heating before the Planning Commission City
ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of Me application in writing. Any interested perry 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 W opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a pad of the hearing process. The Commission will Gose the
public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirin 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 commerciadindustnal.
• 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 perwn wishvigto follow en item through the
process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Cixmal meeting.
• A neighbortlood 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! persoms).
• Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence
regarding the application will ba included in the report to the City Council, ff you man to have something to be included in the report,
lea" contact the Planning Staff penfort named on the notification.
Notice of Public Hearing
Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting
Date & Time:
Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until
later in the evenin depending on the order of theagenda,
Location:
City Hall Council Chambers 7700 Market Blvd.
Proposal:
To consider a request for a variance for a second driveway on
property zoned single family residential (RSF).
Applicant:
Faye Kamrath
Property
2740 Orchard Lane
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/2017-13. If you wish to talk to
someone about this project, please contact MacKenzie
Questions &
Walters by email at mwalters(&ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by
Comments:
phone at 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.
NEWT Sign up to receive email and/or text notifications when meeting agendas,
packets, minutes and videos are uploaded to the city's website. Go to
www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/notifyme to sign u I
City Review Procedure:
• Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings.
Comprehensive Plan AmeWments 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.
• Start 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 recommerication.
The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will Gose 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 commerciaAmdustrial.
• 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 chock with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting.
• A neighborhood spokesperwnlreprewntative 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 Parisi
• Because Me Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any comespondenca
regarding Me application will be included in the report to the City Council. H you wish to have something to be included in Me report,
lease contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification.
TAX NAME
TAX _ADD _L1
TAX _ADD _L2
TAX _ADD _L3
ANN M FURY
2821 WASHTA BAY RD
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7821
BARBARA N NEVIN
6361 MINNEWASHTA WOODS DR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-8897
BETH A EVANS
24415 WOOD DR
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
BRANDON AJARCHOW
2820 WASHTA BAY RD
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7820
CARLOS HERNANDEZ
2651 ORCHARD LN
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7807
CHAD HERMAN
2851 NORTH MANOR RD
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7836
CHARLES E WONHOF
6180 CLUB VALLEY RD
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
CHESTER BUTTERFIELD
2671 ORCHARD LN
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7807
CHRISTOPHER J ERICKSON
2731 SANDPIPER TRL
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7812
CYNTHIA PALMA KELLY
6331 MINNEWASHTA WOODS DR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-8897
DAVID C & STACY L BRAY
2751 SANDPIPER TRL
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7843
DAVID E & COURTNEY L H OLSON
2820 TANAGERS LN
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7818
DEAN R & JUDITH M BERSIE
2800 TANAGERS LN
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7818
DEMETRIUS A MATTHEWS
16180 HIGHWAY 7
MINNETONKA
MN 55345-3403
DENNIS L HANSEN
2841 NORTH MANOR RD
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7836
DEON & DIONA BADHWA
2660 ORCHARD LN
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7804
DOMINIKA CHARTIER
6345 MINNEWASHTA WOODS DR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-8897
DOUGLAS & LISA DZURIK
5790 MARSH POINT DR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331
EDWARD W SHERIDAN
6150 CLUB VALLEY RD
ISHOREWOOD
MN 55331
ERIC D & DAWN R RYNDERS
2821 NORTH MANOR RD
IEXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7836
ERIK A HAYS
FAYE KAMRATH
GAIL KNUTSON
HEATHER E CAMPAIN
2810 SANDPIPER TRL
2731 ORCHARD LN
2641 ORCHARD LN
2837 TANAGERS LN
EXCELSIOR
EXCELSIOR
EXCELSIOR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7811
MN 55331-7806
MN 55331-7807
MN 55331-7819
HEIDI ANN BUTLER
24405 WOOD DR
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
JAMES F & MARY ELLEN JESSUP
6350 MINNEWASHTA WOODS DR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-8898
JAMIE A KIEFER
1038 LOMA LINDA AVE
MOUND
MN 55364-9756
JASON D WITTA & SARA M WITTA
24625 YELLOWSTONE TR
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
JEFFREY L & FAYE KAMRATH
2731 ORCHARD LA
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331
JEFFREY L KAMRATH
2731 ORCHARD LN
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7842
JEFFREY R VOORHEES
24650 WILTSEY LA
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
JEREMY & BETH CONE
6320 MINNEWASHTA WOODS DR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-8898
JOHN L FERM
2920 WASHTA BAY RD
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7822
JOSHUA G LACEY
2661 ORCHARD LN
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7807
JUNGGON SEO
2750 SANDPIPER TRL
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7810
KATHERINE ELIZABETH NORHEIM
KATHERINE P OLSEN
KATHRYN F KLADEK
6320 FOREST CIR
2821 TANAGERS LN
6321 MINNEWASHTA WOODS DR
EXCELSIOR
EXCELSIOR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-8859
MN 55331-7819
MN 55331-8897
KERI J FREIENMUTH
2720 SANDPIPER TRL
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7810
LE SEIM & T B SEIM
24400 WOOD DR
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
LANCE & KARIN NEWELL
24655 YELLOWSTONE TR
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
LARRY P FORBORD & BETH FORBORD
24600 WILTSEY LA
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
LAWRENCE E &JEAN M SCHWARTZ
6170 CLUB VALLEY RD
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
LESLIE M MICHEL
2840 WASHTA BAY RD
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7820
LINDA L PLANTIKOW
24750 WILTSEY LA
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
LORI R COCKING
24410 WOOD DR
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
MARK FRAZIER
2700 SANDPIPER TRL
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7810
MARK STAUBLY
2740 SANDPIPER TRL
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7810
MARY LOU OLSON
6340 FOREST CIR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-8859
MICHAEL P CHAPMAN
2831 NORTH MANOR DR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7836
MICHAEL P RENNINGER
6310 MINNEWASHTA WOODS DR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-8898
MICHAEL R FAEGRE
2800 SANDPIPER TRL
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7811
NEWTON A & LINDA S BRISLEY
5317 COUNTY ROAD 6 SW
HOWARD LAKE
MN 55349-5005
RICHARD J & YVONNE A BROWN
2630 ORCHARD LN
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7804
RICHARD R TRADWELL
5515 TIMBER LN
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331-1710
ROBERT A & JENNIFER BUSHWAY
2721 SANDPIPER TRL
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7812
ROBERT L ALFORD
6355 MINNEWASHTA WOODS DR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-8897
SCOTT GURGEL
2830 WASHTA BAY RD
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7820
SCOTT R BOCKS
6340 MINNEWASHTA WOODS DR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-8898
SIDNEY LOREN LEVIN
2841 TANAGERS LN
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7819
STEPHEN T & MARY A HUGHES
2741 SANDPIPER TRL
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7812
STEWART R & MARILYN J PETERSON
2810 TANAGERS LN
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7818
TERRY W STODOLA
6330 FOREST CIR
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-8859
TIMOTHYJ RADEBACH
24395 WOOD DR
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331
WILLIAM G & SUZANNE M JOHNSON
2670 ORCHARD LN
EXCELSIOR
MN 55331-7804
WILLIAM HOOFNAGLE
WILLIAM J 0 NEILL
2910 WASHTA BAY RD
6145 CLUB VALLEY DR
EXCELSIOR
SHOREWOOD
MN 55331-7822
MN 55331
MEMORANDUM
TO: MacKenzie Walters, Planner
FROM: Stephanie Smith, Project Engineer
DATE: June 20, 2017
RE: Application for variance for second driveway on property zoned single-family residential
(RSF) and located at 2740 Orchard Lane
It is my understanding that the applicant, Faye Kamrath, would like to construct a second driveway for
her detached garage onto Orchard Lane. The proposed driveway is 82 feet long and 16 feet wide. The
driveway would be constructed at approximately the same location as shown on her building plan for the
detached garage dated July 15, 2013.
The existing site conditions include a Manage 2 Wetland on the northwest portion of the property. A
home and an existing gravel driveway are located on the eastern portion of the property. The detached
garage sits on the western half of the property over 200 feet away from the existing driveway.
The large size of the lot and the distance between the existing driveway and garage make it problematic to
meet the code requirement for one driveway. To meet the code requirement, the applicant had proposed
an approximately 200 -foot driveway extension to connect the existing garage to the existing driveway.
Staff supports a variance allowing the second driveway, because the second driveway would result in less
hardcover, therefore less stormwater runoff. The large size of the lot also allows the proposed location of
the driveway to meet the 40 -foot standard set in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan for driveway spacing.
Due to the proximity to the wetland, double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any
excavation on the site. Additional erosion and sediment control measures may be required with staff
review of the driveway permit.
If the Planning Commission approves this variance, the applicant must also apply for a driveway permit,
and the driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction requirements/details as
well as the requirements in City Code Sec. 20-1122 Access and driveways.
Staff recommends approval of the variance with the following conditions of approval:
1. Double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any excavation off the site.
2. A driveway permit is required prior to beginning construction of the driveway.
3. The driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction
requirements/details as well as the requirements in City Code Sec. 20-1122 Access and
driveways.
4. The driveway shall be surfaced with a bituminous, concrete or paver surface.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MacKenzie Walters, Assistant Planner
FROM: Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resources Specialist
DATE: June 20, 2017
SUBJ: 2740 Orchard Lane, Variance Request
The applicant is proposing to install a second driveway on the property and the proposed
alignment from the road to the garage is the best alternative as compared to an extension of the
existing driveway which would cause increased hard surface coverage and loss of landscaping.
The proposed drive should preserve the existing trees on either side of the alignment. The
applicant shall install tree protection prior to any construction activities.
Recommendations:
1. The applicant shall install tree protection fencing around existing trees prior to any
construction activities.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
VARIANCE 2017-13
1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby
grants the following variance:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance request to allow
for a second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane
2. Property. The variance is for a property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County,
Minnesota, and legally described as Lot 6 Minnewashta Park.
3. Conditions. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions:
a. The applicant must apply for and receive a driveway permit.
b. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around existing trees prior to any
construction activities.
c. Double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any excavation of
the site.
d. The driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction
requirements/details as well as the requirements in City Code Section 20-122 Access
and Driveways.
e. The driveway shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete, or paver surface.
f. As stipulated by City Code Section 20-977 the detached garage may not be used to
operate or store material for a home occupation.
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: June 20, 2017
(SEAL)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
(ss
COUNTY OF CARVER
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Denny Laufenburger, Mayor
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of ,
2017 by Denny Laufenburger, Mayor and Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen,
a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to authority granted
by its City Council.
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952)227-1100
I am requesting a variance to install a second driveway to a detached garage at 2740
Orchard Lane. Since there is an existing driveway servicing the house on the property, a
variance is required to allow installation of a second driveway to service the detached garage.
The garage is used to store several classic cars as well as lawn and grounds maintenance
equipment and snow blowers. While not having a driveway did not seem to be much of an issue
when we built the garage, it since has become somewhat of a problem.
The garage is currently accessed by driving over the lawn from the roadway. While this
initially worked, as more trips over the lawn have occurred, the grass has gradually been killed
resulting in an unsightly and difficult to use dirt road, especially during wet weather and in the
spring.
A driveway from Orchard Lane to the garage would greatly enhance the accessibility to
the garage, eliminate the unsightly dirt road and yet blend in well with the property.
The proposed driveway would blend well with the aesthetics of the neighborhood. The
proposed width of 16 feet corresponds with the other driveways. Other driveways on Orchard
Lane range in length from 60 feet to 120 feet in length. The proposed driveway is 82 feet long.
The distance between driveways on Orchard Lane varies from as little as 12 feet to 165
feet. The distance from the proposed driveway to the next nearest driveway is 205 feet. It will
be the only driveway on the block from Sandpiper Trail to Minnewashta Woods Drive.
The proposed driveway is 145 feet from the comer of Sandpiper Trail and Orchard Lane
allowing a reasonable distance for vehicles turning onto Orchard Lane and vehicles entering or
exiting the proposed driveway to safely react to each other.
I plan to install additional shrubbery, plants and flowers near the proposed driveway so it
blends in well with the other landscaping on the property. I will assess how to best accomplish
that once the driveway has been installed.
There are some difficulties in attempting to comply with the ordinance and installing a
driveway from the house driveway to the garage. The most significant issue is the distance
involved. A driveway from the house to the garage would be approximately 240 feet long, while
a driveway from Orchard Lane to the garage would be 82 feet. That would result in considerably
less hard pack.
The configuration of the property does not lend itself to installing a driveway from the
house to the garage in an aesthetically pleasing manner. Since the house is located on the end of
the property, and the garage at the opposite end, a driveway complying with the ordinance would
run the entire length of the property and parallel to Orchard Lane. Since there is a wetland
behind the house, the only feasible route would be across the front yard of the house. This would
create a frontage road appearance, much more obtrusive and certainly would not fit in with any
of the other properties on Orchard Lane, who all have more conventional driveways. It would
significantly detract from the current landscaping, the turn of the century ambiance of the
property, as well as restricting any future landscaping.
Granting a variance for a second driveway would do far less to alter the character of the
neighborhood than would a driveway in compliance with the ordinance.
We have grown very fond of the property and have spent considerable time upgrading the
house and improving the grounds. A variance for a second driveway would further enhance our
efforts to continue to improve what we consider a rather unique property.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Planning Division - 7700 Market Boulevard CITY OF CIIA NSEN
Mailing Address - P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: (952) 227-1300 / Fax: (952) 227-1110
APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Submittal Date: 5/J9�3 PC Date: 70 + CC Date: /O 1 I 60 -Day Review Date:
(Refer to the appropriate Application Checklist for required submittal information that must accompany this application)
❑
Comprehensive Plan Amendment .........................
$600
❑
❑ Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers .....
$100
❑
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
❑ Single -Family Residence. ..............................
❑
❑ Single -Family Residence ................................
$325
❑
❑ All Others.........................................................
$425
❑
Interim Use Permit (IUP)
$150
❑
❑ In conjunction with Single -Family Residence..
$325
❑ All Others .........................................................
$425
❑
Rezoning (REZ)
through the development contract.
❑ Planned Unit Development (PUD) ..................
$750
❑ Minor Amendment to existing PUD .................
$100
❑ All Others.........................................................
$500
❑
Sign Plan Review ...................................................
$150
❑
Site Plan Review (SPR)
❑ Administrative ..................................................$100
❑ Commercial/Industrial Districts* ......................$500
Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area:
thousand square feet)
9ndude number of existing employees:
Include number of new employees:
❑ Residential Districts .........................................
$500
Plus $5 per dwelling unit (— units)
OfNotification
Sign (City to install and remove) .........................
❑ Subdivision (SUB)
❑
Create 3 lots or less ........................................$300
(Additional recording fees may apply)
❑
Create over 3 lots.......................$600 + $15
per lot
❑ Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)
blots)
❑ Single -Family Residence. ..............................
❑
Metes & Bounds (2 lots)..................................$300
$275
❑
Consolidate Lots..............................................$150
❑ Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA).................
❑
Lot Line Adjustment .........................................
$150
❑
Final Plat ..........................................................$700
(Includes $450 escrow for attorney costs)*
*Additional escrow may be required for other applications
through the development contract.
❑ Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (VAC)........
$300
(Additional recording fees may apply)
Variance (VAR) ....................................................
$200
❑ Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)
❑ Single -Family Residence. ..............................
$150
❑ All Others .......................................................
$275
❑ Zoning Appeal ......................................................
$100
❑ Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA).................
$500
NOTE: When multiple applications are processed concurrently,
the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
9' Property Owners' List within 500' (City to generate after pre -application meeting) .....
❑■
$200
�Rg:.
....I,
..'....r.-............ ... $3 per address
..... .
W_ addresses)
Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that apply) ........................... ......... .... $50 per document
❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Interim Use Permit ❑ Site Plan Agreement
men- .-P�' Variance ❑ Wetland Alteration Permit
❑ Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 dors.) ❑ Easements( easements) -1 ,,,, _ _
Description of Proposal:
MAY 16 61-1
CHANHA$$EN PLANMNG 0FNt
Property Address or Location: a 7YD Qin L N A I t /' I A h/ r
Parcel #:21�. S1SfloLl(] Legal Description:
Total Acreage: c(, S Wetlands Present?
Present Zoning: Select OneA@5 nlonl- lq5=
Present Land Use Designation: Select One
Yes ❑ No
Requested Zoning: Select One
L aT 0(Q f t or '7
Requested Land Use Designation: Select One
Existing Use of Property: 1,' ,,I:: IS q A 0j,r-TA hfl7 T.?(1irm Cnll/4(#4 Is ST 42,6 (A N
❑ Check box is separate narrative is attached.
��'' P ZF E ATT"M OF SURVEY POR
5G GRAPHI2,5 C SCALE too SAMPSON CONSTRUCTION
Scale in U.S. Survey Feet PART OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 116, RANGE 23, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
LEND
• DENOTES 1/2" IRON PIPE FOUND, MARKED RLS 9053
O DENOTES 1/2" IRON PIPE SET, MARKED KROSCHEL 44490 \
A DENOTES LATH SET Cs ;^.
\ Fii....
..J T
;A.
\ MMX OliW UNE--
!•?3Nii•iENiA.`sNTA nnRl•:
allow
1i
�owAl
�2- algq
3j'kCL. C)WM,)A--
APPROVED \
DEPT.: app \
DATE: %/(f�/ j
BY: Skl L
DEPT.:
DATE-Ic1-13
V
c
V;.goo,
,
/
:r_ y '116
N.l
NOTE BEARINGS SEGW4 ARE ASSL,W C
Description of Surveyed Prol2erty,,
The southerly line of Lot 6, Minnewashta Park,
Carver County, Minnesota.
Notes to Surge.
1. For the purposes of this survey, existing
easements of record were not researched.
I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or
under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor
u ' \ under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
ri• -`'
Dated this ��ay of k1.lL�/ .�
\ 8y.
\
TylerJ. c Land Surveyor
Minnesota License
No. 44490
"AA,"A
Kroschel Land Surveyors, Inc.
1639 Main Street North, Suite 6, Pine City, MN 55063
Phone: 320-629-3267 Fax: 320-629-0176
•:
;A.
:r_ y '116
N.l
NOTE BEARINGS SEGW4 ARE ASSL,W C
Description of Surveyed Prol2erty,,
The southerly line of Lot 6, Minnewashta Park,
Carver County, Minnesota.
Notes to Surge.
1. For the purposes of this survey, existing
easements of record were not researched.
I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or
under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor
u ' \ under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
ri• -`'
Dated this ��ay of k1.lL�/ .�
\ 8y.
\
TylerJ. c Land Surveyor
Minnesota License
No. 44490
"AA,"A
Kroschel Land Surveyors, Inc.
1639 Main Street North, Suite 6, Pine City, MN 55063
Phone: 320-629-3267 Fax: 320-629-0176
•:
� F
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
�N H A S�
PROPOSED MOTION:
PC DATE: June 20, 2017
CC DATE: July 10, 2017
REVIEW DEADLINE: July 18, 2017
CASE #:SS,J 3 ffn4A
BY: MW, SS, S
"The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance request to allow for a
second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane, subject to the conditions of approval and adopts
the attached Findings of Facts and Decisions."
(Note: A motion for denial and appropriate findings of fact are also included at the end of the
report.)
�d kov1G bcij pekL4 w 4 e(ef„,4r4 6ekj ✓ 4l
i, O;rK f✓�
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting a variance to create a second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane.
Currently the property has a single gravel driveway on the southeast comer of the lot which does
not serve the detached garage located on the southwest corner of the property. The second
driveway would be located approximately 200 feet from the existing driveway. The proposed
second driveway would add approximately 1,440 square feet of impervious surface to the
property, whereas extending the existing driveway to connect to detached garage would increase
the property's impervious surface by an estimated 3,800 square feet. A variance is required
because city ordinance limits residential lots to a single driveway access.
LOCATION: 2740 Orchard Lane
(PID 255150040)
APPLICANT: Faye Kamrath
2731 Orchard Lane
Excelsior, MN 55331
OWNER: Faye Kamrath
2731 Orchard Lane
Excelsior, MN 55331
PRESENT ZONING: RSF
2030 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density
ACREAGE: 4.4 acres 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.
PROPOSAUSUMMARY
The applicant wishes to improve
access to the property's detached
garage. Currently the garage is
accessed by driving across the
lawn. This has caused the grass in
the area to die off which has
effectively created a dirt driveway
which is difficult to navigate when
the ground is wet.
The applicant proposes to improve
POND Y \ m
LOT a �i�%✓✓ \ r
.� �.
XRNffWASNTA PARA `p '
4 6 a
s
the situation by creating a second driveway. This driveway would be 82 feet long, including the
area in the right of way, and 16 feet wide, and would add about 1,440 square feet of impervious
surface to the property. It would be located approximately 210 feet from the property's existing
driveway. The driveway would be the only one accessing Orchard lane between Minnewashta
Woods Drive and Sandpiper Trail. It would be located about 145 feet from the intersection of
Orchard Lane and Sandpiper Trail.
The applicant has stated that it would be impractical to meet ordinance by connecting the
detached garage to the existing driveway because of the distance involved. A connecting
driveway would need to be around 240 feet long and would result in significantly more
impervious surface being constructed on the property. They also believe that the wetland located
on the property would require the connection to pass in front of the house and run parallel to
Orchard Lane, a configuration which would be detrimental to the neighborhood's aesthetics.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 1, General Provisions
Section 1-2, Rules of Construction and Definitions
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances
Chapter 20, Article VI. Wetland Protection
Chapter 20, Article V1I. Shoreland Management District
Chapter 20, Article XII. "RSF" Single-family residential district
Section 20-615. Lot requirements and setbacks.
Chapter 20, Article XXIV, Division 2, Parking and Loading
Section 20-1122. Access and Driveways
BACKGROUND
The original house was built in 1900.
On August 22, 2013, the city issued a building permit for a detached garage. The detached
garage was not connected to the existing driveway, and note was placed on survey indicating that
a driveway to the street was not allowed.
On May 25, 2017, staff was informed that a home occupation, namely a lawn care/landscaping
business, was being run from the detached garage at 2740 Orchard Lane. Staff followed up on
the complaint and determined that the property is being used to store lawn care equipment.
On May 30, 2017, staff sent a letter to the property owner informing them of the City's home
occupation ordinance and instructing them to ensure that the property is in compliance by Friday,
June 9, 2017.
On June 9, 2017the property owner spoke with Construction Manger Ferraro and stated that the
building had been used to store lawn care equipment for use on their property and that no
business was being run from the property. The owner stated that the equipment has been
removed.
SITE CONDITIONS
The property is zoned Single -Family
Residential and is partially located within
the city's Shoreland Management District.
There is also a large Manage 2 Wetland
covering most of the northern half of the
property. This zoning district requires lots to
be a minimum of 20,000 square feet, have
front yard setbacks of 30 feet, rear yard
setbacks 30 feet, side yard setbacks of 10
feet, and limits hardcover to a maximum of
25 percent of lot area. Residential structures
are limited to 35 feet in height. As the lot was created before May 14, 2017, structures should be
set back at least 40 feet from the edge of the wetland. [ Verify]
The lot is 4.4 acres, and currently has 5,050 square feet of impervious surface resulting in 2.6
percent lot coverage. The proposed driveway expansion would increase this to 6,490 square feet
of impervious resulting in 3.4 percent lot coverage. The properties existing buildings conform to
all applicable setbacks.
Minnewahsta Park
The plat for this area was recorded in November 1887. Numerous subdivisions have occurred on
the neighboring properties resulting in a predominance of third to half acre lots, with several
larger one to one and half acre lots mixed it. Within the neighborhood, the property in question is
unique both for its acreage and for the size of its wetland. All of the properties in this area are
zoned Single Family residential District.
Variances within 500 feet:
82-02 2730 Orchard Lane: Approved wetland fill and grading for construction of single family
home.
Non -conforming driveways (2 access) within 500 feet:
2630 Orchard Lane: 2 driveways on Orchard Ln, approximately 250 feet apart.
2641 Orchard Lane: I driveway on Orchard Ln and 1 driveway on Forest Ave, approximately 60
feet apart.
2660 Orchard Lane: 2 driveways on Orchard Ln, approximately 100 feet apart.
2821 Washta Bay Rd: 2 driveways on Washta Bay, approximately 80 feet apart.
ANALYSIS
One Driveway Requirement
The Single Family Residential District (RSF) has a minimum lot frontage of 90 feet. In order to
prevent an extremely high density of driveway accesses along roads serving these and other
residential districts Section 20-1122(10) limits each residential lot to a single driveway access.
Additionally the 2030 Comprehensive Plan espouses a standard spacing of at least 40 feet between
driveways. This ordinance and the comprehensive plan guidelines exist to prevent possible public
safety and traffic issues that can emerge from a high concentration of closely spaced driveways, and
also for aesthetic considerations involving insuring adequate greenspace and providing for an
appealing viewscape in residential neighborhoods.
The property at 2740 Orchard Lane has approximately 350 feet of frontage along Orchard Lane, and
the start of the proposed second driveway is about 215 feet from the end of the existing driveway.
For reference, the distance between the existing driveway and the driveway of the property to the
east along Orchard Lane is roughly 90 feet.
distances between the single
driveway accesses of two single
family homes is significantly less
than the 215 feet that would
separate the proposed driveway
from the existing driveway. For
these reasons staff does not
believe that granting this variance
would negatively impact the
character of veiwscape of the
neighborhood.
The applicant has also noted that
a driveway which complied with
the ordinance would need to run
parallel with Orchard Lane for
over 200 feet which would create
the appearance of a frontage road. This configuration would be out of character with other
properties in the area, would likely have a larger impact on the character of the neighborhood.
Concerns Over Home Occupation
Staff has been contacted by multiple residents who have expressed concern that this driveway will
be used to allow the intensification of a landscaping business that they believe is being operated
from the detached garage. Staff has sent a letter to the applicant informing them that the detached
garage cannot be used to conduct a home occupation and requesting that they clarify the use of the
structure by June 9, 2017.
The owner spoke to staff and stated that the shed was only being used to store lawn care equipment
for use on their property, and that the equipment has been removed. They have stated that no
business is being run from the property.
Staff views the variance request as separate from the potential for a code violation, and will work to
ensure the property is being used in a manner permitted by city code regardless of the outcome of
the variance case; however, in order to avoid confusion, staff is recommending that a condition of
the variance be that the detached garage may not be used to store items related to or to conduct a
home occupation.
SUMMARY
The applicant wishes to install a second driveway on their property to provide access to their
detached garage. The applicant's current practice of driving over the grass has essentially created
a dirt driveway that is difficult to navigate in wet weather. The applicant could gain access to the
detached garage by connecting it to the house's existing garage; however, this would
significantly increase the amount of impervious surface on the property. The lot is question is a
The property's house, located in the lot's southeast corner, is currently served by an existing gravel
driveway. The large frontage of the property means that a second driveway serving the detached
garage, located in the lot's southwest comer, could be accommodated without creating either the
public safety, traffic, or aesthetic issues that can stem from a dense collection of driveways. The
distance between the two driveways would be greater than is typical between the driveways of two
RSF parcels and would conform to the comprehensive plan's 40 -foot standard.
Impervious Surface
The applicant has a large property
and could connect the detached
garage to the existing driveway
without exceeding the property's 25
percent impervious surface limit;
however, this would require a
significantly long driveway. Staff
sketched out two alternative
driveway paths that would meet
code. The first alternative travels in
front of the house and, assuming a
12 -foot wide 239 -foot long
driveway connecting to the
proposed 30 by 32 foot apron,
would have a surface area of 3,828
square feet. The second alterative
travels behind the house and,
assuming 12 -foot wide 337 -foot
long driveway connecting to the
proposed 30 by 32 apron, would
have a surface area of 5,004 square
feet. In contrast, the proposed driveway, a 16 -foot wide 30 -foot long driveway connecting to a 30 by
32 foot apron would have a surface area of 1,440 square feet.
Staff's alternative routes are conceptual, and it is likely that a less hardcover intensive route could
be created; however, any attempt to connect the detached garage to the existing driveway would
result in significantly more impervious surface than the proposed second driveway. Increased
impervious surface means increased stormwater runoff. Engineering staff supports this variance
request as it the proposed second driveway's environmental impacts are less intense than the
impacts of a driveway meeting code.
Impact on Neighborhood
Using aerial photos to survey properties within 500 feet of the applicant staff found that 4 of the 67
Properties had two driveway accesses. Three of these properties were located on Orchard Lane, and
the distance between their two accesses ranged between 100 feet and 60 feet. Generally, the
*4
Pitz
r ,�
FCl81
:�7L
wS
I
MMiEWA5HI1
PARA '
o
'M
pF
z
31sM NO V
nP ..:
� 1
}'..
,coo
a.z."a
ziji
i+Yb
_
bt.a. �tzv
titb
l -a * 6Lq
feet. In contrast, the proposed driveway, a 16 -foot wide 30 -foot long driveway connecting to a 30 by
32 foot apron would have a surface area of 1,440 square feet.
Staff's alternative routes are conceptual, and it is likely that a less hardcover intensive route could
be created; however, any attempt to connect the detached garage to the existing driveway would
result in significantly more impervious surface than the proposed second driveway. Increased
impervious surface means increased stormwater runoff. Engineering staff supports this variance
request as it the proposed second driveway's environmental impacts are less intense than the
impacts of a driveway meeting code.
Impact on Neighborhood
Using aerial photos to survey properties within 500 feet of the applicant staff found that 4 of the 67
Properties had two driveway accesses. Three of these properties were located on Orchard Lane, and
the distance between their two accesses ranged between 100 feet and 60 feet. Generally, the
large 4.4 -acre parcel with around 350 feet of frontage along Orchard Lane and the proposed
second driveway would be located 200 feet from the existing driveway.
Staff believes that the proposed second driveway will not negatively impact the surrounding
neighborhood, will not create safety or traffic issues, and will result in less impervious surface
and a smaller environmental impact than extending the existing driveway to serve the detached
garage.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the variance request to allow for a
second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant must apply for and receive a driveway permit.
2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around existing trees prior to any
construction activities.
3. Double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any excavation of
the site.
4. The driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction
requirements/details as well as the requirements in City Code Section 20-122 Access
and Driveways.
5. The driveway shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete, or paver surface.
6. As stipulated by City Code Section 20-977 the detached garage may not be used to
operate or store material for a home occupation.
Should the Planning Commission deny the variance request to intensify the nonconforming use,
it is recommended that the planning Commission adopt the following motion and attached
Finding of Fact and Decision:
"The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies a variance request to allow for a
second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and
Decisions."
ATTACHMENTS
1. Finding of Fact and Decision Approval
2. Finding of Fact and Decision Denial
3. Development Review Application
4. Public Hearing Notice Mailing List
5. Engineering Comments
6. Environmental Resources Specialist Comments
7. Variance Document
G:\PLAN\2017 Planning Cases\17-13 2740 Orchard Lane - Variance\PC Staff Report -2740 Orchard Lane.doc
• IK ►I0 Jul
TO: MacKenzie Walters, Planner
FROM: Stephanie Smith, Project Engineer
DATE: June 20, 2017
RE: Application for variance for second driveway on property zoned single-family residential
(RSF) and located at 2740 Orchard Lane
It is my understanding that the applicant, Faye Kamrath, would like to construct a second driveway for
her detached garage onto Orchard Lane. The proposed driveway is 82 feet long and 16 feet wide. The
driveway would be constructed at approximately the same location as shown on her building plan for the
detached garage dated July 15, 2013.
The existing site conditions include a Manage 2 Wetland on the northwest portion of the property. A
home and an existing gravel driveway are located on the eastern portion of the property. The detached
garage sits on the western half of the property over 200 feet away from the existing driveway.
The large size of the lot and the distance between the existing driveway and garage make it problematic to
meet the code requirement for one driveway. To meet the code requirement, the applicant had proposed
an approximately 200 -foot driveway extension to connect the existing garage to the existing driveway.
Staff supports a variance allowing the second driveway, because the second driveway would result in less
hardcover, therefore less stormwater runoff. The large size of the lot also allows the proposed location of
the driveway to meet the 40 -foot standard set in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan for driveway spacing.
Due to the proximity to the wetland, double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any
excavation on the site. Additional erosion and sediment control measures may be required with staff
review of the driveway permit.
If the Planning Commission approves this variance, the applicant must also apply for a driveway permit,
and the driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction requirements/details as
well as the requirements in City Code Sec. 20-1122 Access and driveways.
Staff recommends approval of the variance with the following conditions of approval:
1. Double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any excavation on the site.
2. A driveway permit is required prior to beginning construction of the driveway.
3. The driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction
requirements/details as well as the requirements in City Code Sec. 20-1122 Access and
driveways.
4. The driveway shall be surfaced with a bituminous, concrete or paver surface.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
MacKenzie Walters, Assistant Planner
FROM:
Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resources Specialist
DATE:
June 20, 2017
SUBJ:
2740 Orchard Lane, Variance Request
The applicant is proposing to install a second driveway on the property and the proposed
alignment from the road to the garage is the best alternative as compared to an extension of the
existing driveway which would cause increased hard surface coverage and loss of landscaping.
The proposed drive should preserve the existing trees on either side of the alignment. The
applicant shall install tree protection prior to any construction activities.
Recommendations:
1. The applicant shall install tree protection fencing around existing trees prior to any
construction activities.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Planning Division — 7700 Market Boulevard
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Mailing Address — P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: (952) 227-1130 1 Fax: (952) 227-1110
AGENCY REVIEW REQUEST
LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
Please review and respond no later than the review response deadline
Agency Review Request Date:
Agency Review Response Deadline:
Date Application Filed:
May 23, 2017
June 8, 2017
May 19, 2017
Contact:
Contact Phone:
Contact Email:
MacKenzie Walters
952-227-1132
mwalters@ci.chanhassen.mn.us
Assistant Planner
Planning Commission Date:
City Council Date:
60-Day Review Period Deadline:
June 20, 2017 at 7:00 p.m.
July 10, 2017 at 7:00 p.m.
July 18, 2017
Application:
Request for a variance for a second driveway on property zoned single family residential RSF) and located at 2740 Orchard
Lane. Applicant/Owner: Faye Kamrath.
Planning Case: 2017-13 1 Web Page: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us12017-13
In order for staff 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. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated.
City Departments: Federal Aoencies: Adjacent Cities:
❑ Attorney ❑ Army Corps of Engineers ❑ Chaska
® Building Official ❑ US Fish & Wildlife ❑ Eden Prairie
® Engineer ❑ Jackson Township
® Fire Marshal Watershed Districts: ❑ Minnetonka
® Forester EI Shorewood
® Park Director E] Carver County
El Victoria
r
® Water Resources [:] Lower River
El Law Enforcement ® Minnehaha Creek Adjacent Counties:
E] Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek
❑ Hennepin
Carver County Aoencies:
Utilities: ❑ Scott
❑ Community Development
❑ Cable TV — Mediacom
❑ Engineer School Districts:
El Environmental Services El Electric — Minnesota Valley
E] Electric — Xcel Energy E) Eastern Carver County 112
El Historical Society
El Parks E]Magellan Pipeline ElMinnetonka 276
El &Water Conservation District E] Natural Gas — CenterPoint Energy
❑ Phone — CenturyLink Other Agencies:
State Agencies: ❑ Hennepin County Regional Railroad
ElBoard of Water & Soil Resources Authority
ElMN Landscape Arboretum
❑ Health
El SouthWestTransit
F-1HistoricalSociety
El TC&W Railroad
El Natural Resources-Forestry
❑ Natural Resources-Hydrology
❑ Pollution Control
❑ Transportation
Section 3: Property ..
APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as applicant, represent to have obtained
authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to
the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. If this application has not been signed by
the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. 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 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. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.
Name: Contact:
Address: Phone:
City/State/Zip: Cell:
Email: Fax:
Signature: Date:
PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do,
authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those
conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods. 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. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.
Name: 1:r4ytz KA lM u7U Contact:
Address: 731 aQCIUAIZ I'4flK Phone:
City/State/Zip: FY-LFcrSeUQKA �' I S%-111 Cell:
Email: UR4 hf13Fax:
Signature: Date:
This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by
applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist
and confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and applicable procedural
requirements and fees.
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.
PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable)
Name: Contact:
Address: Phone:
City/State/Zip: Cell:
Email: Fax:
Section 4: Notification Information
Who should receive copies of staff reports? *Other Contact Information:
❑ Property Owner Via: ❑ Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy Name:
❑ Applicant Via: []Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy Address:
❑ Engineer Via: ❑ Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy City/State/Zip:
❑ Other* Via: ❑ Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy Email:
INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your
device. PRINT FORM and deliver to city along with required documents and payment. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital
copy to the city for processing (required).
SAVE FORM PRINT FORM SUBMIT FORM
Property Card
Parcel ID Number 255150040
Taxpayer Information
y.
9
a
hyo
ts�e9P
t
�hsrdt^
i
°
.
Taxpayer Name
FAYE KAMRATH
Mailing Address
2731 ORCHARD LN
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-7806
Property Address
Address
2740 ORCHARD LN
City
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331
Parcel Information
Uses Res 1 unit
GIS Acres 44
Net Acres
Deeded Acres
Plat
Lot
Block
Tax Description
Building Information
Building Style 1 1/2 Story Frame
Above Grade 1671
Finished S Ft
Bedrooms 2
Year Built 1900
Garage Y
Miscellaneous Information
School District
0276
Watershed District
1 WS 062 MINNEHAHA CREEK
Homestead
N
Green Acres
N
Ag Preserve
N
Assessor Information
Estimated Market Value
2016 Values
(Payable 2017)
2017 Values
(Payable 2018)
Last Sale
Land
$159,100.00
$159,100.00
Date of Sale
8/12/2010
Building
$110,300.00
$124,300.00
Sale Value
$195,000.00
Total
$269,400.00
$283,400.00
The data , .roses only. This a: soraole •o, legal, engineering, surveying w other similar purposes. Carver County does not gua,ardea the accuracy of the
inforrnabor shed on an' as is ba, e nc Carver County makes no rapreah,stons or vramanues..0i akp,assed orimpbetl, for the memhantahilty or fdness a the
infomaaUon provided for any purpose. This disclaimer s pno,,ded pursuant to Minnesou Stables §466.03 and the user of the data
pmNdetl harem aclmowfedges that Garner Courtly shall not be tattle for any damages, and by using the dials as any way eWacsty waives all dams, and agrees to defentl, ntlemmly, and hold
harmless Cana, county, na officials, officers. agents, employees, etc. from any and all claims bough by aryone wno uses the information poMedi for Karan. its employees or agents, or
. parties whirl, arse out of uses access. By accepter of this data the user agrees Trot to transmit ins data of p,orda across to it or any part of a to another party unless die user includes
w the data a copy W this dos laimar.
Tuesday, May 23, 2017 Carver County, MN
13ow b/ Tof 3
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET
EXISTING & PROPOSED HARDCOVER
ADDRESS: 2?gt) O rc.lwr-A L,o_t a
A. HOUSE So X 30 = )Soo S.F.
I to X 20 = 3 Zo S.F.
x = S.F.
x = SF
x = S.F.
B. GARAGE 30 XGA _ _ IQ 96 _ S.F.
S.F.
C. DRIVEWAY 30_ X t o 0 =
PRuAis e� SJR r v�2 wf} Y ! r X = on S.F.
i 4 sly S.F.
D. SIDEWALKS 'I, x810
3 X So = 15-0 S.F.
x — S.F.
E. PATIO; lo X Zo = Z.op S.F.
x = S.F.
F. OTHER X = S.F.
(ex: shed,) x = S.F.
x = S.F.
RECEIVED TOTAL HARDCOVER: S.F.
jUl 1 2013 TOTAL LOT SIZE: A S.F. Ici1, 6WS. fq.Y
HARDCOVER PERCENTAGE: � .6 /o
'?HANHASSEN II,;SPECTION` MAJOMUM % ALLOWABLE: 25
APPROVED BY: _cz DATE: V8 /f
COMMENTS:
Carver County
Taxpayer Services Department
Laurie Davies, Manager
600 East 4" Street, P.O. Box 69 p ��
Chaska, MN 55316-0069
v 952-361-1910-www.co.Garver.mn.us '0
For the following visit our website at www co carver mn us V
• Pay your rues online
• Sign up for our Tu Payment Reminder
• Print additional copies of your Tax Statement
Property ID #: 25.5150040
M�
Taxpayer: FAYE KAMRATH 02010653
2731 ORCHARD LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-7842
REFUNDS?
You may be eligible for one or
even two refunds to reduce
your property tax. Read the
back of this statement to
find out how to apply.
Bill#: 836592
Property Address:
2740 ORCHARD LN
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-7806
Property Description
Section 04 Township 116 Range 023
MINNEWASHTA PARK Lot 006
& LOT 7 EXC THAT PART DESC AS: COMM
AT NW CORN OF LOT 7 TH ELY ON N LINE
OF LOT 393.7 TH SLY AT RT ANGLE TO N
LINE OF PLEASANT AVE TH NWLY ALONG
NLY LINE OF PLEASANT AVE TO W LINE OF
LOT 7 TH NLY ON W LINE OF LOT 7 TO PT
OF BEG
Line 13 Special Assessment Detail:
RECYCLE MGT RESIAG
Principal: 25.00
Interest:
25.00
VALUES AND CLASSIFICATION
Is Year: 2016
cel Value: 236,500
Step Homestead Exclusion:
1 Taxable Market Value:
New Improvements/
Expired Exclusions:
Property Classification:
2
236,500
Res Non-Hstd
PROPOSEDTAX
53,316.00
2017
269,400
269,400
Res NomHstd
PROPERTY TAX STATEMENT
itep
First half taxes due: May 15 1,671 .00
3
Second half taxes due: October 16 1,671 .00
Total Taxes Due in 2017: 3,342.00
Tax Detail for Your Property:
Texas Payable Year: 2016 2017
1. Use this amount on Form M1PR to see 0 you are eligible for a property tau refund. ❑
File by August 15. It this box is checked, you owe delinquent taxes and are not eligible.
2. Use these amounts on Form M7 PR to see if you are eligible for a special refund.
a a
3.
Property taxes before credits
2,927.00
3,317.00
wa
4.
Credits that reduce property taxes A. Agricultural market value credits
FU
B. Other Credits
5.
Property taxes after credits
2,927.00
3,317.00
6.
County A. CARVER COUNTY
920.27
1,046.19
B. CO RAIL AUTHORITY
2.59
2.83
7.
City or Town CITY OF CHANHASSEN
573.56
642.65
8.
State General Tax
9.
School District SD 0276 MINNETONKA
A. Voter Approved Levies
721.67
825.82
B. Other Local I evies
530.80
594.69
a
R
�
10.
Special Taxing Districts A. Metro Council
21.62
23.63
&•'m°
B. Metro Mosquito Control
11.31
12.75
0'
C. Metro Transit District
35.23
39.98
D. Carver County CDA
40.23
46.64
a
E. Watershed
41.89
50.70
11.
Non -school voter approved referenda levies
27.83
30.92
12.
Total property tax before special assessments
2,927.00
3,317.00
13.
Special Assessments Interest: Principal: 25.00
25.00
25.00
14.
TOTAL PROPERTY TAX AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
2,95200
3,342.80
If you owned and occupied this property as your homestead on January 2, 2017, you may qualify for
one or both of the following refunds:
$$$ REFUNDS 1. The Pro y Tam Refund - If your taxes exceed certain income -based thresholds, r�td your total
household income is less than $ 108,660.
You may qualify for 2. The Special Homestead Credit Refund - Ifou also owned and occupied this property as your
one or both refunds homestead on January 2, 2016 and both of the following are true:
. The netproperty tax on your homestead increased by more than 12 percent
from the from 2016 to 2017, and
State of Minnesota ' The increase was at least $100, not due to improvements on the property.
For Form MIPR and instructions:
based on your � Minnesota Tax Forms
2017 Property Taxes O,www.revenue.state.mn.us (651) 296-3781 Mail Station 1421
Lil St. Paul, MN 55146-1421
Make sure to provide your Property ID Number on your MIPR to ensure prompt processing.
Senior Citizen Property Tax Deferral
The Senior Citizen Deferral Program provides a low-interest loan to senior citizens having difficulty paying property taxes. This is
not a tax forgiveness program, however, this program:
Limits the maximum amount of property tax paid to 3% of total household income, and
Ensures the amount of tax paid remains the same as long as you participate in this program.
To be eligible, you must file an application by July 1, 2017, as wen as:
1. Be at least 65 years old,
2. Have a household income of $60,000 or less, and
3. Have lived in your home for at least 15 years.
To receive a fact sheet and application for this program, go to www.revenue.state.mn.us and type keyword "deferral" into the search
box, or call the Minnesota Department of Revenue at (651) 556-4803.
If you are blind, disabled or paraplegic, you may be entitled to receive a special tax classification for the home in which you live.
For more information about this special tax classification, contact the Carver County Assessor's office at 952 361-1960.
Penalty for Late Payment of Property Tax
If you pay your first half or second half property tax after the due dates, a penalty will be added to your tax. The later you pay, the
greater the penalty you will pay. The table below shows the penalty you will pay if your property taxes are not paid before the date
shown. To avoid a penalty, envelopes must be postmarked by the due date to be considered paid on time. First half tax payments must
be paid in full with penalty (if applicable) prior to applying money toward second half payment. If you are unsure of how penalty is
calculated or how much is due, please contact us at (952) 361-1910.
Personal Property Located on
Leased Government-owned Land:
Taxes may be paid in two installments due at the
same time as real property taxes.'Ihese taxes are
subject to the same penalty schedule and penalty rates
as real property taxes. All other personal property
taxes are due in full on or before May 15, 2017.
Note to manufactured home owners:
The title to your manufactured home cannot be
transferred unless all current and delinquent
personal property taxes due at the time of the
transfer are paid.
2017
2018
Property Type:
a
Homesteads and Cabins
lst half
2%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
8%
8%
-
8%
10%
2nd half
-
-
-
-
-
-
2%
6%
-
8%
10%
Both Unpaid
-
-
-
-
-
-
5%
7%
-
8%
10%
Agricultural
Homesteads
lst half
2%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
10%
2nd half
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
6%
8%
10%
Both Unpaid
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
7%
1 8%
10%
Nonhomesteads
Ist half
4%
8%
9%
10%
11%
12%
12%
12%
-
12%
14%
2nd half
-
-
-
-
-
-
4%
8%
-
12%
14%
Both Unpaid
-
-
-
-
-
-
8%
10%
-
12%
14%
Agricultural
Nonhomesteads
1st half
4%
8%
9%
10%
11%
12%
12%
12%
12%
12%
14%
2nd half
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
8%
12%
14%
Both Unpaid
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10%
12%
14%
Personal Property
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
M
8%
8%
Manufactured Homes
1st half
-
I I
-
I
-
-
I
8%
I I
8%
I
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
2nd half
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
8%
8%
8%
Personal Property Located on
Leased Government-owned Land:
Taxes may be paid in two installments due at the
same time as real property taxes.'Ihese taxes are
subject to the same penalty schedule and penalty rates
as real property taxes. All other personal property
taxes are due in full on or before May 15, 2017.
Note to manufactured home owners:
The title to your manufactured home cannot be
transferred unless all current and delinquent
personal property taxes due at the time of the
transfer are paid.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING CASE NO. 2017-13
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a
public hearing on Tuesday, June, 20, 2017 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
for a second driveway on property zoned single family residential RSF) and located at 2740
Orchard Lane. Applicant/Owner: Faye Kamrath.
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/2017-13 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.
MacKenzie Walters
Email: mwalters(&ci.chanhassen.mn.us
Phone: 952-227-1132
(Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on June 8, 2017)
2740 Orchard Lane - Variance - Planning Case 2017-13
$200.00 Variance
$200.00 Notification Sign
$198.00 Property Owners List (66 addresses x $3 each)
$50.00 Escrow for recording variance documents
$648.00 TOTAL
$648.00 BALANCE OWED
GRAPHIC SCALE
50 0
.r 25 50 100
Scale in U.S. Survey Feet
I APPROVED
DEPT.: n"N
DATE: 7/(t/f j
By: 5471
DEPT.: I A)(
DATE -Id-�-
BY:
SAMPSON CONSTRUCTION
PART OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 116, RANGE 23, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
'aP
/
\ �ropdted " 32x36
161,3 0
I,`tI q0
1
Md��eNZ�e nd
NOTE BEARINGS SHawN ARE ASSMM
liescription of Surveyed Property.
The southerly line of Lot 6, Minnewashta Park,
Carver County, Minnesota.
Dotes to Survey
1. For the purposes of this survey, existing
easements of record were not researched.
I hereby certify that this survey, pion 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 Slate of Minnesota.
Dated this
-7-2/ ay of - S. /III- �Z
By.
Tyler J. Kroschel, Land Surveyor
Minnesota License No. 44490
"AA"
Kroschel Land Surveyors, Inc.
1639 Main Street North, Suite 6, Pine City, MN 55063
Phone: 320-629-3267 Fax: 320-629-0176
mfil
��
Ajt z
J ArJV q60
7e. 2=boo
s2x Jd
_ pE�i
22-k Iz= 44
36. 12
q3Z
/2 z Lt
rir
77,.12 =
774
1N7 v11_
1764
5,004 tt ft
"AA"
Kroschel Land Surveyors, Inc.
1639 Main Street North, Suite 6, Pine City, MN 55063
Phone: 320-629-3267 Fax: 320-629-0176
Chanhassen Planning Commission — June 20, 2017
4. The developer shall not encroach into the Bluff Creek Primary Zone.
5. The developer shall comply with the with the 40 foot primary zone setback and preserve or
create a 20 foot buffer from the primary zone.
6. The buffer will be required to have a vegetation management plan and soil amendments.
7. The plans shall be revised to remove any structure in the BCOD.
Commissioners Undestad, Randall and Madsen voted in favor. Commissioners Aller,
Yusuf, Tietz and Weick voted in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 3 to 4.
Undestad moved, Randall seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission
recommends the City Council approve the Variance to encroach, not to exceed 1.3 acres,
into the primary zone and required buffer for the construction of the development; and
adopts the amended Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Commissioners Undestad,
Randall and Madsen voted in favor. Commissioners Aller, Yusuf, Tietz and Weick voted
in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 3 to 4.
Aller. The motion does not carry. And that finishes Avienda at this point in time and they'll of
course be back after their consideration with the City Council on future items. Before you go
gentlemen I want to thank you again for your presentations and for your continued efforts in
working with the City and we look forward to seeing you as the project progresses.
Darren Lazan: Thanks for your time.
Mark Nordland: Thank you very much.
PUBLIC HEARING:
2740 ORCHARD LAND: REOUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR A SECOND DRIVEWAY
ON PROPERTY ZONED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RSF) AND LOCATED AT
2740 ORCHARD LANE. APPLICANT/OWNER: FAYE KAMRATH.
Walters: Alrighty whenever you're ready.
Aller: We're ready.
Walters: So this is Planning Case 2017-13, 2740 Orchard Lane variance. It will go if appealed
before the City Council on the 10th. It's the applicant and owner Faye Kamrath is proposing a
second driveway access for her property. The property is zoned Residential Single Family and I
have the minimum criteria for that zoning standard up here. 15,000 square foot lot, 30 foot front
yard setback, 10 foot side yard. It needs to have a 40 foot setback from the Manage 2 wetland to
the north of the property. It's limited to 25 percent hard cover and our code limits every
27
Chanhassen Planning Commission — June 20, 2017
residential property to a single driveway access. This parcel is about 4.4 acres and currently has
about 2.6 percent impervious surface. This right here is a picture of the site conditions. As you
can see the rear of the property has a very large wetland. There is a rental, a house that is
currently being rented out to a tenant here which is served by an existing gravel driveway. There
is no garage on the house and then there's a detached garage that is being used for storage by the
property's owner. Currently it's accessed by driving over the grass which has basically created a
dirt way and the variance is to allow them to have a paved driveway to better access that
detached garage. It is within the shoreland overlay district of Lake Minnewashta and we had
approved the detached garage to be built without a driveway in 2013. The applicant is proposing
the second driveway. One of the big reasons they're asking for it is because it would result in a
lot less impervious surface for the lot. They do have because it's such a large property they
could connect the proposed garage to the existing gravel driveway. Doing so would require at
least 3,800 square feet of impervious surface. A second driveway access would require a 1,440
square feet of impervious surface. The other factor to consider is this is a very large property. It
has about 350 feet of lot frontage. That allows for quite a bit of space between the existing
driveway and the proposed driveway. I believe it actually works out to 215 feet separation
between the existing gravel driveway and the proposed second driveway so typically you know
you have a minimum 90 foot frontage in single family lots so the gap would be larger than you'd
see generally between driveways in this district. The alternative of building a frontage style road
paralleling Orchard Lane would have a larger visual impact on the neighborhood so they are
proposing constructing a 32 by 30 foot apron and serving it by a 30 foot by 16 foot driveway.
The area here in the right-of-way does not count towards the property hard cover and again that
would be 1,440 square feet. So staff looked it over. It's indisputable that it would result in
significantly less impervious surface and less stormwater runoff possibly being directed into the
wetland. Just for fun I sketched out two alternatives that they could do that meet code.
Alternative I as I mentioned ended up being at 3,828 square feet of impervious surface.
Alternative 2 looping behind the house past 5,000 square feet of impervious surface so it would
have a lot less impact in terms of stormwater generation to do the second driveway. As
mentioned the main reason we restrict the amount of number of driveway accesses is to create a
situation where you have lots of cars entering in a short space. There is a lot of spacing between
the comprehensive plan's guidelines are 40 feet of spacing. At 215 it's well in excess of that.
Looking around at the neighborhood we found 4 other properties starred here within 500 feet that
also have a second driveway access. Those are all legal non-conforming's so because it seems to
comply with the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan would result in substantially less
impervious surface being constructed and we don't believe that the spacing would create any
safety issues, as well as having less of a visual impact on the character of the neighborhood staff
does support this variance request. I would be happy to take any questions at this time.
Aller: Can you tell us what if any way the use of the garage would have on our deliberations?
Walters: We were contacted as was in the staff report by resident's concern that the garage was
being used to run a home occupation. That would not be allowed by city code. The applicant
has been informed of this. They have stated that it is not being used for that purpose. That it's
E
Chanhassen Planning Commission — June 20, 2017
all personal storage. Staff is recommending just to make certain it's clear that a condition be
placed that the property not be used for a home occupation. But ultimately the property's
compliance with that aspect of the code is viewed as a separate issue from the variance. Staff
will enforce city code whether this variance is granted or not and in neither event this property
would not be allowed to have a home occupation run out of the garage.
Aller: And that same result would be utilized with any of the other properties that have legal
non -conforming uses within 500 feet for instance if there was a business being run out of there.
It would not be permitted and a neighbor could potentially bring that to the City's attention and
then the City would have to act.
Walters: Yep, just like any property in the city whether they have one driveway or two
driveways. If I get a call saying there's a home occupation we investigate. We do our due
diligence and if we find out that there's reason to believe there is one we work with the property
owner to bring it into compliance. Yep.
Aller. Thank you. Any additional questions of staff at this point in time?
Weick: When you say home occupation you mean a business out of the home?
Walters: Yeah. So without going too deep into the weeds the city code does not allow any type
of business to be run out of a detached accessory structure so no garages. It doesn't matter
where, the only exception are existing agricultural uses.
Weick: I was just confused by that terminology. I'd never seen that before.
Walters: Yep.
Aller: Great, okay. We'll move on. If the applicant would like to come forward and make a
presentation that would be great. If you could step up and state your name and address for the
record sir and then tell us about your project.
Jeff Kamrath: Okay. I'm Jeff Kamrath. I live at 2731 Orchard Lane which is across the road
from this piece of property. My wife actually owns the property. We bought the property
approximately 10 years ago. The lady who lived there was a 86 year old widow. The property
had gone into quite a state of disrepair. It was very over grown with brush and trees and
buckthorn. We spent 2 years cleaning up the property. Cleaning up the brush. Mitigated a lot of
buckthorn that's in the woods on the property. We also went ahead and did the buckthorn along
Sandpiper Trail even though it's not our property. It enhanced the appearance of the property so
we cleaned that up as well. My wife has planted many gardens there and improved a lot of the
landscaping with shrubs and we view it as kind of a unique piece of property. It's a large piece
of property. It's very visible because it's the biggest piece of property when you come into the
neighborhood so we've tried to be good neighbors and keep it up and improve it and make it
29
Chanhassen Planning Commission — June 20, 2017
look well. We've gotten many comments from other neighbors along that line that appreciate
what we've done here. I built the garage 4 years ago with the full understanding that you know
we would not be allowed to have a second driveway. We've just been driving across the grass
and thus created basically a dirt road to the garage is what's happened. The issue of the
driveway actually came up, the road contractor who's doing the streets there needed a place to
store materials and to store equipment. It was very convenient for him because we have a large
piece of property and he said if we would allow him to do that he would put a driveway in for us
so that's why we're applying for the variance. Trying to take advantage of an opportunity here
to be very truthful about that so. But the driveway seems to St in with the neighborhood. It
doesn't seem to create any issues that staff has found and again it's a much better option than try
to build a driveway from all the way across from the east side of the property and we just think it
would enhance the property. Enhance it's appearance and enhance the use of the property for us.
Aller: Thank you. Any questions of the applicant? Seeing none thank you sir.
Jeff Kamrath: Thank you.
Alter: Okay at this point in time I'll open up the public hearing portion of this item so again this
is an opportunity for any individual that's present to come forward and state their position or ask
questions or comment on the matter before us. Seeing no one come forward I will close the
public hearing. Open it up for commissioner comments.
Tietz: Well I understand the situation. I tried to bike down that road the other day and almost
had to walk my bike down the road so I understand the situation over there but it seems like a
good solution.
Aller: Any other comments? Questions? Again thank you for the report. It's very clear and
again for those at home these reports that we receive are on the website so feel free to go take a
look at them. With that I'll entertain a motion.
Madsen: I'll make a motion.
Aller: Commissioner Madsen.
Madsen: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance request to
allow for a second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane subject to the conditions of approval
and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision.
Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Yusu£ Second.
30
Chanhassen Planning Commission — June 20, 2017
Aller: Having a motion and a second, any further discussion? Hearing none I'll put the matter to
a vote.
Madsen moved, Yusuf seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments
approves a variance request to allow for a second driveway access at 2740 Orchard Lane,
subject to the following conditions and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decision:
I. The applicant must apply for and receive a driveway permit.
2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around existing trees prior to any construction
activities.
3. Double silt fence must be in place to protect the wetland prior to any excavation of the
site.
4. The driveway must be constructed in accordance with current construction
requirements/details as well as the requirements in City Code Section 20-122 Access and
Driveways.
The driveway shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete or paver surface.
6. As stipulated by City Code Section 20-977 the detached garage may not be use to operate
or store material for a home occupation.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
Aller: Okay we have two other items coming before us for public hearing. With the
commissioners permission I'd like to kind of take a poll and see who's here on what and try to
deal with the one with the biggest impact first or second, whichever way we'd like to do it so by
a raise of hands those individual who are here for item 2, West Park. I have 2, 4, 6, 7. And item
3, the Venue at Aldi. 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Probably just take them as is. There doesn't seem to be
a big significant difference. Is staff ready to go with item 2 which is West Park?
PUBLIC HEARING:
WEST PARK 8601 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD: REZONING, SITE PLAN
REVIEW SUBDIVISION AND VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH VARIANCES
ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AND SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RSF) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN 82 UNIT TOWNHOME
DEVELOPMENT AND LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF WATERS EDGE DRIVE, WEST
OF GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD NORTH OF HIGHWAY 212 AND BISECTED BY
LAKE SUSAN DRIVE. APPLICANT: PULTE HOMES. OWNER: BRIAN
KLINGELHUTZ.
31