The URL can be used to link to this page

CAS-28_JOHN & CINDY HART - 951 HOMESTEAD LANENon4wtnneble Item -Folder Number a } _ John & Cindy Had - 951 Homestead Lane ©© • 951 Homestead Lane - 25-6100110 Variance to exceed maximum detached accessory stricture size Job Number .-L)42 Box Number (? t-) S ?v v ' CITY OF (IHANHASSEN l i ) Market Boulevard a �o� gx147 >> s° ssen, Minnesota 55317 °g 1 ianhassen.mn.us 3 SUBJECT _. o e a n1aFEary gG 1 SE Ito 10 All 00INO gg3 \\,``N I Disclaimei 0G` \ ., This map is nein \�\„ ` covey and is not intended to tis email uas one. This map is a compile. \, .ud data Ixated in various riy, county, state and federal off lces and other t .area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not .e Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this nap are error free, : .My does not represent than the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other r.ur ,ose reguinng enacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the de*tion of geographic features. g more or discrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107. The preceding dlsclxirner is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §455.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and Ne user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all clams, and agrees to defend, hormi ity, and hold hanniess the Gy from any and all claims brought by User, its mialoyeas or agents, or third parties wTich arse out of the users access or use of data provided. 3317®y _ _•s . F G a c •:, hav- 147 049J82036654 0 $ 00.410 11108i2007 Mailed From 55317 US POSTAGE JOHN C & JACKIE J DANIELS 1111 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8613 11111111 i 111 t i 1 t t 1111111! 11 11 111 11 1 f n i t I I t l I I n i l i i i!! I i i if if!i NSN SCANNED Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of theagenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for a variance to exceed the maximum detached Proposal: accessory structure size to construct an addition to an existing detached garageon property zoned Rural Residential RR Applicant: JDA Desi n Architects Owner: John & Cindy Hart Property 951 Homestead 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 What Happens public hearing through the following steps: at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the Droiect. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/sery/plan/07-28.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Questions & Auseth by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1132. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercialfindusMal. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. SCANNED 0 0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND ACTION IN RE: Application of John and Cindy Hart for a 177 square -foot variance from the 1,000 square - foot size limitation for an addition to a 725 square -foot detached garage — Planning Case No. 07- 28. On November 20, 2007, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the Application of John and Cindy Hart for a 177 square -foot variance for an addition to an existing detached garage at 951 Homestead Lane, located in the Rural Residential District (RR) on Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance that was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential (RR). 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential -Large Lot (2.5 acre minimum, 1/10 acre outside MUSA). 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition. 4. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a. The literal enforcement of the ordinance does create a hardship. In 1987 when the homeowners built their home, they chose to build a detached garage rather than an attached garage with the intention of expanding it in the future, at which time there was not a size limitation for accessory structures in the Rural Residential (RR) District. The ordinance was changed in May 2007 limiting detached accessory structures to 1,000 square feet. There are pre-existing standards within the neighborhood. There are eight properties within the Pioneer Hills Development with detached accessory structures in addition to an attached garage, four (4) of which exceed the 1,000 square foot limitation. b. The conditions upon which this variance is based are not applicable to all properties in the RR zoning district. City Code was change in May of 2007 limiting the size of a detached accessory structure in the RR district to 1,000 square feet. The subject site is unique due to the fact that the detached garage is the only garage located on property. The neighboring properties with detached accessory structures are in addition to an attached garage. 0 0 c. The purpose of the variation is not based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, the applicant wishes to have a woodworking shop as well as extra storage space. d. The alleged hardship of exceeding the 1,000 square -foot maximum accessory structure is not a self-created hardship. The applicant built the detached garage in 1987 with the intention of expanding the garage in the future. The ordinance was amended in May of 2007, limiting the size of detached accessory structures to 1,000 square feet. Several neighboring properties in the Pioneer Hills Development currently have detached accessory structures in addition to an attached garage, some exceeding the 1,000 square foot limitation. The subject site is unique due to the fact that the detached garage is the sole garage on the property. e. The variance may not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. The parcel is 2.5 acres in size and has a natural berm along Homestead Lane, which screens the garage. Thus, the addition will have minimal impact on the neighboring properties. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets. The addition is within the required setbacks and impervious surface requirements of the property. 5. The planning report #07-28 Variance dated November 20, 2007, prepared by Angie Auseth, et al, is incorporated herein. ACTION "The Planning Commission approves Planning Case 07-28, for a 177 square -foot variance from the maximum 1,000 square -foot detached accessory structure for an addition to a detached garage on Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition, based on the findings of fact " 2007. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 20th day of November, CHANHASSEN PLANNING g:\plan\2007 planning casw\97-28 hart varianceVindings of fact.dm 0--7-2-8 Meuwissen, Kim From: Sue Nelson [SNelson@ck-law.com] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 10:35 AM To: Meuwissen, Kim Subject: RE: 07-28 Variance Thank you! I will mark it on my recordings summary list. Susan R. Nelson Legal Assistant CAMPBELL KNUTSON, P.A. 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Direct Dial: (651) 234-6222 Office Phone: (651) 452-5000 Fax: (651) 452-5550 Email: snelson-@ck-law.com -----Original Message ----- From: Meuwissen, Kim [mailto:kmeuwissen@ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 10:29 AM To: Sue Nelson Subject: 07-28 Variance Sue, I received in today's mail recorded Variance 07-28 directly from Carver County. It was recorded on 1- 28-08 at 2:30 pm as Document No. A477789. I thought you would like to know. Kim Meuwissen City of Chanhassen Planning Secretary 952-227-1107 SCANNED 2/11/2008 RECEIVED OFFICE OF THE ry1@flt 1i0. COUNTY RECORDER FEB 1 1 2008 /1 A 47 7 7 8 9 CARVER COUNTY MINNESOTA CTjY OF CHANHASSEN Fee $ 46 00 Check4WSOn. Certfied Recorded on 01-2&2008 at 02 Cad 1771I11789 II�I�I'�III'IIII'll CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA VARIANCE 07-28 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants the following variance: The Planning Commission acting as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals approves Planning Case 07-28, for a 177 square -foot variance from the maximum 1,000 square -foot detached accessory structure on property located in the Rural Residential (RR) District to permit a 452 square -foot addition to a detached garage at 951 Homestead Lane, as shown in plans by JDA Design Architects, dated October 18, 2007. The decision was not appealed to the City Council pursuant to Section 20-29(d), therefore, the granting of the variance is final. 2. Property. The variance is for property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills 3. Conditions. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. A building permit is required for the construction of the garage. 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: November 20, 2007 SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN L±m ka.�� BY: (SEAL) Thomas A. Furlong, May AND: f o Gerhardt, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ( ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this%9*day of 2007 by Thomas A. Furlong, 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. NOT PUB KAREN J. ENGELHARDT Notary Public -Minnesota - �,y Commieslon Exp1e%Ja� 31.2010 DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 FAX (952) 227-1110 TO: Campbell Knutson, PA 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Copy of letter LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE JOB NO. 12/19/07 07-28 ATTENTION Sue Nelson RE: Document Recording ® Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Change Order ❑ Pay Request ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION 1 11/20/07 07-28 Hart Variance 07-28 951 Homestead Lane ❑ FORBIDS DUE THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ For your use ❑ As requested ❑ For review and comment ❑ FORBIDS DUE REMARKS COPY TO: Angie Auseth, Planner I ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Returned for corrections ® For Recording ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US SIGNED Kim uwi en,(95 )227-1107 N enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA VARIANCE 07-28 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants the following variance: The Planning Commission acting as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals approves Planning Case 07-28, for a 177 square -foot variance from the maximum 1,000 square -foot detached accessory structure on property located in the Rural Residential (RR) District to permit a 452 square -foot addition to a detached garage at 951 Homestead Lane, as shown in plans by JDA Design Architects, dated October 18, 2007. The decision was not appealed to the City Council pursuant to Section 20-29(d), therefore, the granting of the variance is final. 2. Pro rt . The variance is for property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition 3. Conditions. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. A building permit is required for the construction of the garage. 4. Law. If within one (1) year of the issuance of this variance the allowed construction has not been substantially completed, this variance shall lapse. Dated: November 20, 2007 (SEAL) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: n Thomas A. Furlong, May AND: kw" S' ao—'! Gerhardt, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this /flay of 2007 by Thomas A. Furlong, 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. NOT PUB Via`"" � KAREN J. ENGELIip,RDT ;' Notary Public -Minnesota 'i-�._.. � My Commission Expres �^ 31,2010 DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 CITY OF CHMNSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone. 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park 8 Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.2271300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952 2271125 Fax 952.227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen. mn.us 0-7 -24 John and Cindy Hart 951 Homestead Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Accessory Structure Variance — Planning Case #07-28 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hart: This letter is to formally notify you that on November 20, 2007, the Chanhassen Planning Commission approved Planning Case 07-28, for a 177 square -foot variance from the maximum 1,000 square -foot detached accessory structure for an addition to a detached garage on Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition. The variance is valid for one year from the approval date. A building permit must be applied for prior to November 20, 2008. If you have any questions, please contact me at 952-227-1132 or by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. Sincerely, z Angie AusethS,Aa Planner I c: Jerry Mohn, Building Official Building Permit File g:\plan\2007 planning cases\07-29 hart varianceVetter of approval.doc SCANNED The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A gieal place to live, work, and play. ri CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 20, 2007 Chairman McDonald called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jerry McDonald, Kevin Dillon, Kathleen Thomas, Debbie Larson, Mark Undestad and Dan Keefe MEMBERS ABSENT: Kurt Papke STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; and Angie Auseth, Planner I PUBLIC HEARING: AN EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE ON PROPERTY ZONED RURAL Public Present: Name Address John & Cindy Hart 951 Homestead Lane John Meyering 1050 Homestead Lane Angie Auseth presented the staff report on this item. McDonald: Okay, Mark. Do you have any questions? Undestad: Just a, they built the home, it says that they built the detached garage with the intent to add on in the future. Did their initial, original plans show a larger structure at that time? Auseth: Not that I am aware. Undestad: Okay. And when did they bring in the permit? Auseth: The permit was brought in on the last deadline date. Or the variance was brought in at the last date. Undestad: The variance was. Auseth: Correct. SCANNED Planning Commission Meeting - November 20, 2007 Undestad: Did they bring in a plat or permit earlier for the structure itself? Auseth: No. Undestad: Okay. McDonald: Debbie. Larson: I know I read it and I know you just said it. When did the rule change? Auseth: In May of 2007. Larson: Okay. And were, was there any way that people would have known this? I mean was it in the newspaper or how did they know? Auseth: We advertise that there are zoning, or code amendments being done. They're not specific to the changes. We do publish them however in the newspaper. Larson: In the newspaper. In the Chan Villager? Okay. Dillon: So when the ultimate plans that you suggested here were proposed to the homeowner, what was the response? Auseth: Their response was, they would like to have their addition that they are requesting. Dillon: Okay. And was there any, was there seem to be a willingness to negotiate at all or is it this way or no way? Auseth: From what I can tell that this is what they requested and this is what they would like to do. Dillon: Okay. That's the only question I had. McDonald: Okay. Dan. Keefe: No questions. McDonald: Kathleen. Thomas: No. Thank you. McDonald: I have no questions of staff either at this time. Would the applicant like to come forward and present their side to this case? John Hart: Yes. Thank you. I'm John Hart. The homeowner and thank you for having us in this evening. We have in fact been planning this for a long time. The original drawings done in r 2 Planning Commission Meeting - November 20, 2007 1987 do not show anything other than what you have just seen here. With, let's see I guess, oh there we are. With the existing garage as it is. The addition is intended as a wood working shop for me as I approach retirement. That's the purpose of this. I understood that part of the reason for the May, 2007 restriction or change in restrictions was to preclude what had become apparently habitual and people using such large structures on their property for business purposes. There's no such intention in this case. It's strictly a hobby for my retirement. The reason that we changed down to, from 20 feet down 8 feet to 12 is not very attractive to us, is that what I'd like to do there is build boats and one needs a shop at least as large as the boat one wishes to build to make it practical. If we could only do 12 feet long, frankly I wouldn't bother with it. I don't know what we'd do, but we wouldn't do it. The idea of connecting the existing garage to the house thereby rendering it attached and freeing us from all restrictions, we could make it any size after that, is certainly to say the least impractical. Can I have one of those pictures to stick up here? I'm not sure how this all works so please excuse me for my inexperience. This is a shot between the, from the driveway between the house on the left and the garage on the right. To extend the garage south to meet the house in any way would make the project outlandishly expensive. The roof of the garage would have to be completely trussed because there's no way to make it match the roofline of the house in any practical way. The beginning of the steep slope to the south would require extensive grading and as you can see there's a deck down there which would be rendered inaccessible by having a garage right up against it. So although in theory that sounds like a reasonable idea, in fact it wouldn't work in any practical sense at all for us. Further, all of the utilities hit the house at that corner, although you can't see them. They're right around the comer to the left. That would all have to be moved. You can see the wellhead there. That would have to get moved as well, requiring a new well to be dug. Again the project would be unreasonable and could not even be approached from a financial aspect. It was mentioned that there are a great many residences near us that have large, in some cases very large external structures. Had we 20 years ago, almost 21 years ago now decided to in fact have an attached garage, this of course would be moot because we could expand it to any reasonable size or any unreasonable size for that matter. As far as we can make out. We chose to have a detached garage those many years ago for, well a variety of reasons, not least of which was certain health concerns about the presence of automobile exhaust, chemicals, gasoline and so forth starting the garage. It was vapors we didn't want transferred into the house. We thought it was a health issue. It is of course unfortunate that we're the first ones apparently applying for a variance in this respect. The hardship issue is dwelt on considerably in the report from city staff and it's difficult to quantify except in the sense that any other approach to producing this size, very modest shop I might add compared to other wood shops, wood working shops or boat building shops, any other approach would be wildly more expensive using the existing structure and extending it in a direction that is almost invisible to neighbor's drive by and anybody else. Is the only realistic way that we can think of to approach the issue. Extending it to the south as I mentioned would be completely prohibitive and cost, really is quite impractical. It will be noticed, I think you distributed responses that we got from all the, all but one of the neighbors within 500 feet. They all apparently need to be polled to get their feelings about this. All were positive about it. The only one that wasn't, and I think it's a matter of corporate bureaucracy is Bluff Creek Golf Course across Pioneer Trail who were unwilling to respond in any way. Positive or negative. Everybody else was positive, as you can see. The photographs that I believe we distributed as well, or renderings from our architect show that the visual impact of this structure is negligible. It's underneath a berm. It matches the current 3 Planning Commission Meeting - November 20, 2007 structure. The only person who can even see it is our next door neighbor and all they see is the same appearance that they see now, except 20 feet closer to them. And it's still a considerable distance from their residence. The east side of which has no windows. So they have to go out of their way to even see it, much less care about it. I've gone over the hardship issue with respect to the alternative approach to building a structure and as I say ... not even consider. Of course had we attached the garage, none of this would have come up. But as I say, we did. There's nothing we can do about that now. There is no intent to do business, as I said there. I have no interest in that, but as I get near my retirement the one thing I don't want to do is more business. I've done that for 40 years now. That's quite enough. I guess, I think that's the end of my statement. Unless there's something you wanted to add? Cindy Hart: Yes... John Hart: Oh, yeah. The other interesting issue is of course that the City's, as the analysis indicates, nobody else has a detached garage. Nobody makes detached garages any longer. There are none in any reasonable distance from us. Nobody else could in any practical way ask for a similar variance because they all have attached garages. They can do whatever they want with them. We are the only ones, as far as we know, certainly within a very large radius around our house that has a detached garage and therefore falls into this crack. And the intentions of the restrictions. Any questions I can answer from anyone? McDonald: Does anyone have any questions for the applicant? I have a question, you say what you want to do is build boats. Is this going to be your new hobby is boat building? John Hart: I hope so, yeah. Assuming I turn out to be good at it. McDonald: Would the intent be to give these away as gifts or would you sell them? John Hart: To my children and I hope to grandchildren as they begin to arrive. McDonald: Okay. I have no further questions. I guess at this point. John Hart: Thanks again for your time. McDonald: At this time we will take comments from anyone that wishes to come up and address the commissioners. Come on up. John Meyering: Hello. I'm John Meyering. One of the neighbors of Hart's. 500 feet close to them and I just want to say that in all appearance for his sake, you can't hardly see where he wants to put it. It's behind a berm and whatever, and but I can't ... see because I live close and I'll be in that situation too because a year ago I added on to my existing garage. Just put a lean to on the one end. Added on, because I'm getting a retirement motorhome in about a year, year and a half, and I didn't know what size in this so I just put a smaller one because I have a motorhome now I want to put inside. So when the rules changed, just last May, I don't think anybody in Chanhassen even seen it in the paper, because I read the paper every week. I'd like to put my thing in because all, all the people that moved out there 14 years ago or later or sooner, we took 0 Planning Commission Meeting - November 20, 2007 the chance that when we bought that land, that the zoning was, we could put up any outside buildings up to so much square footage on the land that we, we have all 2 1/2 acre lots. We're not sitting in town with a half acre or quarter acre lots. So if you saw the landscape, we're all really nice out there. We have all nice properties. We all landscape our yards really nice so, and in Hart's case, they did a very, very good job of putting it down. Trying to landscape it right in there and I can see their point why they'd just like to put it on the one end and that would be about the only spot that you could. So that was about the only comment I had is, they did a very good job of doing that and I think it's, it should be where we should all get notices on when the land, the rules change because that hurts everybody that's out there that as of 10, 14 years ago or when I went out there 14 years ago, I wanted to retire and I'm kind of retired now, and it looks like I'm not going to get my retirement home, motorhome unless I want to leave it outside and that's kind of how ... where I'm not staying in town and, but our kids same thing about his, wants to make boats. That's kind of denying his retirement. What he wants to do and that's all the comments I have. I don't want to take too much of your time but I agree he did a very good job of doing his part and I think he should get it. Thank you. McDonald: Thank you. Does anyone else wish to come forward? Well seeing no one else wanting to come forward, close the public meeting and well bring the issue back before the commissioners for discussion and Kathleen, we'll start down with you. Thomas: Okay. It's, I find it a little hard as you can tell just because I understand where he's coming from and the aspect of you've got a large property. You've got ample amount of square footage. It's the only detached garage in the neighborhood. If it was attached to the house he would be able to punch in another, you could have it as any size you want to. I struggle with the fact that we have the, our rules that are changes for the rules to say how big a size a lot, garage or things of that can be on a lot so I'm still trying to mull this over. McDonald: Dan. Keefe: Yeah you know, I guess where I'm struggling is you know, you know to get a variance you've got to prove a hardship and the question is whether you know hardship is here you know. The only thing that kind of enters into my mind is just the possibility that because it's the only detached garage in the area, everything else is attached. Whether that may elevate itself in that area of hardship. I don't know the answer to that but that's kind of what I'm thinking. McDonald: Okay. Kevin. Dillon: I know every time we get faced with one of these we always get like the consistency question and then we challenge ourselves, now are we being, applying all these things consistently or not, and it's hard because everything, there's always the subtle differences to each situation. In this case, I mean I saw the pictures that came around in the packaging. The guy that made them was a master of photo shopping things or, but it just doesn't look like there's going to be any real detriment to, I mean like an eyesore of any sort. It's you know, the rules, the zoning things changed recently. I'm inclined to you know approve the variance because I just think that we, just kind of the timing and the confluence of factors here, this one you know should be one that we would be okay with. Planning Commission Meeting - November 20, 2007 McDonald: Okay. Debbie. Larson: Well I was kind of with Kevin on that one too. I'm looking at the neighbors and they've all got their auxiliary structures and you know they've al said it's not a problem. I don't see where it's going to look any different. I think it's odd that we have 1,000 foot ordinance on properties of this size. I'm inclined to go with the variance approving as well. McDonald: Okay. Mark. Undestad: Yeah, I guess I'm with Kevin and Deb here that you know again, I mean I kind of understand when they bought these lots years ago they bought these size of lots with the understanding that we can put our sheds, our shops or equipment you know. I mean they can do that with these size lots. I know at times as these come out in the newspaper and people don't always see what they are but to find out the hard way, you know again I think that the motorhome parking in there. I mean he's going to come up here and want a place to park his motorhome and I think when he bought the land back there, it was probably his intention that some day I'm going to have my stuff on here and keep it tucked in and sheltered. You know if they were smaller lots and we were pushing the envelope on hard surfaces and all that, I might look at it a little different but I think I understand why they bought the lots they bought out there and looking at the utilities and the water, the well and you know there's really just no other way to put that on for them so, I guess I'd be inclined to approve it also. McDonald: Okay. I guess the first thing, just because of my legal background, any time you start talking about something where you know the city didn't do something, I feel as though I should correct you. The city followed law in the fact that all that they're required to do is put a notice in the paper to tell everyone that the law is changed. It's your responsibility to keep up with the law. Having said that though, there's a part in here on the thing about hardship that I'm really struggling with because of past variances I know that we've passed. It says the intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances but to recognize that there are pre- existing standards in the neighborhood. That gets us back to, as I go back to this chart and I begin to look at the detached structures that are there and I'm hoping to find that there is a parallelity of structures over 1,000 feet, and of course it's 4-4. But as I said I do recall having gone through this in some older neighborhoods where things have changed and we have tried to accommodate kind of neighborhood standards. So that's what I'm kind of wrestling with because at this point, and again with the petitions that have been put in here, and everybody signing it and looking at the drawings as to what it is, I have a hard time saying no also but I guess that's kind of where I'm at on all this is that I think maybe they've got a case under the hardship to say that there are pre-existing standards and again to go back with the history of all this and what everybody's been doing. And again, not saying anything about when the ordinance changed, you know that was an opportunity for people to come in and speak against it but I understand how things are and again this is what this paragraph does. It allows you an opportunity, kind of a second chance I think. So having said that, I'll throw it open to any commissioners that want to put forth a motion. Larson: A question... or do I have to read it this way? Planning Commission Meeting - November 20, 2007 McDonald: Well you should read it the way it is and then if you want to look at making changes, or you can propose a different motion. Larson: I can? Aanenson: Yes, you can modify the motion and I would certainly recommend that you modify your findings to match your motion. Larson: Modify findings? Right, okay. First of all I will make a motion that the Planning Commission approve Planning Case 07-28 for a 177 square foot variance from the maximum 1,000 square foot detached accessory structure for an addition to the detached garage on Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition based on the findings of fact in the staff report_ And then also amend the finding in Part A where it says literal enforcement .of the ordinance does create a hardship of the useable, of their reasonable use of the property in that he would incur a very large amount of expenses in order to do it the way the city wants. Is that okay? McDonald: I think if you're going to do that, go back up to the paragraph that I read and said that based upon where we're at with the, right here. What it is, that there are pre-existing conditions in the neighborhood. Larson: This one? McDonald: Yeah, if you're going to amend the findings, what we need to say is that there are pre-existing conditions within the. Dillon: Findings are findings. Let's just deal with the... Aanenson: You are approving, recommending Findings of Fact. The Findings of Fact should support your motion. Whether you want to go back and say the fact that this is the only detached garage, which is a reasonable finding because you can have other applications that you want to tie it back to. So that would be one. And then certainly in their recommendation that Commissioner McDonald had would be another appropriate finding because you need to match your motion. McDonald: Right, you need to match the motions up and she's changed the recommendation and the next thing I'll do is ask if anybody wants to do the recommendation that staff did and we'll vote on it from there. Larson: Okay. So do I have to do any more? McDonald: Okay, have we read in the record what we want as far as the finding would be that because that there are pre-existing standards within the neighborhood, this home would be. Larson: Okay, we want it amended to show that the findings, amend the findings to show that there are pre-existing standards in this neighborhood. Planning Commission Meeting - November 20, 2007 McDonald: Of the detached structure which exceeds 1,000 square feet. Larson: Which exceed 1,000 square feet. Okay. With that a second, okay. McDonald: Now, does anyone else wish to make a recommendation? Does anyone wish to push forward the city's recommendation? Staffs recommendation. Okay, then we will vote on Debbie's recommendation. Larson moved, Undestad seconded that the Planning Commission approve Planning Case 07-28 for a 177 square foot variance from the maximum 1,000 square foot detached accessory structure for an addition to a detached garage on Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition, based on the amended findings of fact stating there are pre-existing standards in the neighborhood of detached structures which exceed 1,000 square feet. All voted in favor, except Keefe who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. McDonald: Okay, so it passes 5-1. Okay, and I take it that this will probably go up before City Council. Aanenson: No it won't unless somebody appeals it. Generous: Unless it's appealed within 4 days. McDonald: Okay. If you guys want to appeal. So the motion is approved. The variance is granted. John Hart: Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING: ROSEMOUNT: REOUEST FOR INTERIM USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A TEMPORARY ANTENNA ON TOP OF A BUILDING LOCATED AT 8200 MARKET BOULEVARD. APPLICANT: ROSEMOUNT, INC., PLANNING CASE 07-25. Angie Auseth presented the staff report on this item. McDonald: Kathleen? Thomas: I don't have any questions, thanks. Keefe: What happens at the end of 6 months... Do they apply for another... Auseth: They can formally request to expand. Keefe: Expand it, or require them to take it down or how does that. --1 Affidavit of Publication Southwest Newspapers State of Minnesota) )SS. County of Carver ) SCANNED 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: CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE PUBLIC HEARING (A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal PLAN IN PLANNING CASE N0. newspaper,as provided b Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as P Y PP EN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that amended. the Chanhassen Planning •p ^ Commissionwillholdapublichearing (B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No. / L/ on Tuesday, November 20,2007, at 7:00 was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said p.m. in the Council Chambers in Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit Said notice was cut from the columns of Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition to considers request for a variance to exceed the maximum detached and publication of the Notice: accessory structure size to construct an addition to an existing detached abcdefghijklmnopgrsto garage on property zoned Rural Residential (RR) located at 951 Homestead Lane. Applicant: JDA Design Architects. Owners: John & Cindy Hart. Laurie A. Hartrnann A planshowing the locat ion of the proposal is available for public review on the City's web site at www.ci.chanhasse,n.mn.us/serv/ Subscribed and sworn before me on plan/07-28-h orat City Hallduring regularbusinesshours. Allinterested persons are invited to attend this hearing and express their day � 2007 public opinions with respectto thisproposal. this Of Angie Auseth, Planner I Email: A =�CG,,,d&sxae aauseth&i.chanhassen.mn.us 2010 Phone: 952-2'27- 1132 (PublishedintheChanhassenVillager Notary Public on Thursday, November 8, 2007: No. 4980) RATE INFORMATION Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space.... $40.00 per column inch Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ............................... $40.00 per column inch Rate actually charged for the above matter .............................................. $11.89 per column inch SCANNED 0-7-2,7 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO. 07-28 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, November 20, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for a variance to exceed the maximum detached accessory structure size to construct an addition to an existing detached garage on property zoned Rural Residential (RR) located at 951 Homestead Lane. Applicant: JDA Design Architects. Owners: John & Cindy Hart. 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/sere/plan/07-28.htnil or at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. Angie Auseth, Planner I Email: aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Phone: 952-227-1132 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on November 8, 2007) CITY OF CHANHASSEN P O BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 11/16/2007 8:41 AM Receipt No. 0057179 CLERK: katie PAYEE: JOHN HART 951 HOMESTEAD LANE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Planning Case #07-28 ------------------------------------------------------- GIS List 42.00 'otal Cash Check 17969 Change 42.00 0.00 42.00 0.00 b-7- Z'�- SCANNED City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 aff OF (952) 227-1100 To: John & Cindy Hart 951 Homestead Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 Invoice SALESPERSON DATE TERMS KTM 11/8/07 upon receipt NOTE: This invoice is in accordance with the Development Review Application submitted to the City by the Addressee shown above (copy attached) and must be paid prior to the public hearing scheduled for November 20, 2007. Make all checks payable to: City of Chanhassen Please write the following code on your check: Planning Case #07-28. If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! Date: October 22, 2007 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department By: Angie Auseth, Planner I Subject: HART VARIANCE: Request for a variance to exceed the maximum detached accessory structure size to construct an addition to an existing detached garage on property zoned Rural Residential (RR) located at 951 Homestead Lane. Applicant: JDA Design Architects. Owners: John & Cindy Hart. Planning Case: 07-28 The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on October 19, 2007. The 60 -day review period ends December 18, 2007. In order for us to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission and City Council review, we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on traffic circulation, existing and proposed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need for acquiring public lands or easements for park sites, street extensions or improvements, and utilities. Where specific needs or problems exist, we would like to have a written report to this effect from the agency concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on November 20, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than November 9, 2007. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. City Departments: a. City Engineer b. City Attorney c. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official E Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 3. MN Dept. of Transportation 4. MN Dept. of Natural Resources 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 6. U.S. Fish & Wildlife 7. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services 8. Watershed District Engineer a. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek b. Lower Minnesota River c. Minnehaha Creek 9. Telephone Company (Qwest or Sprint/United) 10. Electric Company (Xcel Energy or MN Valley) 11. Mediacom 12. CenterPoint Energy Mmnegasco Location Map Hart Variance 951 Homestead Lane City of Chanhassen Planning Case 07-28 h � tr 0 m n _ w s *PROPERTY40 Pioneer Trail(Hw 14) sm E ora 4 0` o rare ep J om STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for a 177 square -foot variance from the 1,000 square -foot size limitation for an addition to a 725 square -foot detached garage. LOCATION: 951 Homestead Lane Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition APPLICANT: John and Cindy Hart 04vf"-- 951 Homestead Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: Rural Residential (RR) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential -Large Lot (2.5 acre minimum, 1/10 acre outside MUSA) ACREAGE: 2.5 acres DENSITY: NA SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a 177 square -foot variance for a 452 square -foot addition to a 725 square -foot detached garage. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAIaNNG: 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. Hart Variance Request Planning Case 07-28 November 20, 2007 Page 2 of 7 PROPOSAL SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a variance to exceed the 1,000 square -foot maximum square footage for a detached accessory structure. The property currently has a 725 square -foot detached two -car garage. The applicant is proposing a 452 square -foot addition. The proposed addition exceeds the maximum square footage allowed by 177 square feet. The Zoning Ordinance limits detached accessory structures to 1,000 square feet. The property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) and is located on Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition north of Pioneer Trail. SUBJECT The property owners have other alternatives to expand their garage and comply with City Ordinance. Staff is recommending denial of the variance. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS • Chapter 20, Division 3, Variances • Section 20-904 (1) Accessory Structures. BACKGROUND The property is located on Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition, which is zoned Rural Residential (RR). The subject property has an area of 108,900 square feet (2.5 acres). It has a Hart Variance Request Planning Case 07-28 November 20, 2007 Page 3 of 7 lot frontage of 216 feet and an average depth of 514.7 feet. Minimum lot area in the RR district is two and one-half acres. The site is heavily wooded and has steep sloping topography throughout the site. The existing home and detached garage were built in 1987 by the current homeowners. They chose to build a detached garage at that time with intent to add on in the future. The current detached garage is 725 square feet (22'8" x 32'). The homeowner wishes to add 452 square feet (22'8" x 20') for a total area of 1,177 square feet. This exceeds the zoning ordinance requirement by 177 square feet. The current zoning ordinance pertaining to the maximum 1,000 square -foot detached accessory structure was adopted in May of 2007. Prior to that, City Code limited the size of detached accessory structures for properties zoned Single Family Residential (RSF) and Mixed Low Density Residential (R4) Districts, but not in the Low and Medium Residential District (RLM); nor the Agricultural Estate (A2) and Rural Residential (RR) Zoning Districts since they were at one time related to agricultural uses. While the City's comprehensive plan does not provide for a purely agricultural land use, it does support the preservation of this use in greater Carver County. As the City continues to grow, agricultural uses are being replaced by estate homes. In many cases, contractors were purchasing the property and building accessory structures, in addition to an attached garage, to house their business. Then, the City has to enforce the home occupation code, which prohibits the use of accessory structures for home occupations. In order to address this issue, the code was amended to include all districts that permit single-family homes, within the accessory structure size limitation. At that time it was presumed that legitimate agricultural uses which came in to construct or expand agricultural buildings would be able to receive a variance for such expansion since the size of the structure is related to its use for agricultural purposes. The property does not have an attached garage. The existing detached garage is used for parking their vehicles and because it is detached, it is limited in size by ordinance. The intention of the applicant is to increase the size of their detached garage to accommodate a woodworking hobby as well as increase their storage space. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a 177 square -foot variance from the 1,000 square -foot maximum detached accessory structure. If the garage were attached to the home, the size limitation would not be an issue. There are other feasible options in which to construct an addition to accommodate their needs/desires and be within the zoning regulations: 1. Reduce the size of the addition and maintain the 1,000 square -foot maximum accessory structure. This would allow for a 275 square -foot (approximately 12'x 22'8") addition. 2. Attach the garage to the existing home by locating the addition on the south side of the garage and connect it to the north side of the home. A typical three -car garage is 36 to 40 feet wide by 24 feet deep; the range is 864 square feet to 960 square feet, which is less than the 1,000 square -foot maximum allowed by City Code. Hart Variance Request Planning Case 07-28 November 20, 2007 Page 4 of 7 According to City Code the applicant has reasonable use of the property as defined by a single- family home and a two -car garage. The homeowner could expand their existing garage by 275 square feet without the need for a variance. Site Characteristics The site slopes significantly down from Homestead lane, approximately 8 to 10 feet to the garage; creating a natural berm which screens most of the detached garage from the road. There are not any topographical or pre-existing conditions or characteristics on the site that would constitute undue hardship or the need for a variance. The area in which the garage and house sit is relatively flat which would not require very much grading for the construction of the addition. The applicant currently has a 725 square -foot detached garage on the property. This is larger than a typical two -car garage ranging from 480 square feet to 576 square feet. The applicant can increase the size of their garage by up to 275 square feet and be in compliance with City Code. Permitted Use Reasonable use of a property within the RR district is a single-family home with a two -car garage, which is currently constructed on the property. Accessory structures are also permitted provided they meet the zoning requirements for that lot or development, including the 1,000 square -foot maximum. The addition could be constructed to meet this requirement. In addition, K .4 '+. �1F i„�•Z�d r.'Yj M � i,, k V`r_ M :�� > w� B � ,i�Gr.:}a '}µ. A There are not any topographical or pre-existing conditions or characteristics on the site that would constitute undue hardship or the need for a variance. The area in which the garage and house sit is relatively flat which would not require very much grading for the construction of the addition. The applicant currently has a 725 square -foot detached garage on the property. This is larger than a typical two -car garage ranging from 480 square feet to 576 square feet. The applicant can increase the size of their garage by up to 275 square feet and be in compliance with City Code. Permitted Use Reasonable use of a property within the RR district is a single-family home with a two -car garage, which is currently constructed on the property. Accessory structures are also permitted provided they meet the zoning requirements for that lot or development, including the 1,000 square -foot maximum. The addition could be constructed to meet this requirement. In addition, Hart Variance Request Planning Case 07-28 November 20, 2007 Page 5 of 7 the applicant could construct the garage on the south side of the garage and connect it to the house, at which point the size of the structure would be limited by setbacks and maximum site coverage. 500 Feet The applicant argues that the hardship is not a self-created hardship as the ordinance was changed only months ago and the garage would be consistent with the neighborhood. There are no variance requests for properties within 500 feet of the subject property; however, there are seven properties within the Pioneer Hills Development that have detached accessory structures in addition to an attached garage: Address Detached Structure a rox. In Addition to Attached Garage 901 Homestead Lane 1,080 square feet Yes 951 Homestead Lane* 725 square feet No 1050 Homestead Lane 1,596 square feet Yes 1051 Homestead Lane 200 square feet Yes 1171 Homestead Lane 768 square feet Yes 1181 Homestead Lane 1800 square feet Yes 9650 Flintlock Trail 2,444 square feet Yes 9700 Flintlock Trail 350 square feet Yes The size of the detached accessory structures on properties within 500 feet of the applicant vary in size from approximately 200 square feet to over 4,000 square feet. At the time the permits were approved for the neighboring properties, they were in compliance with City Code. Staff was aware that there were existing accessory structures in excess of 1,000 square feet when the ordinance amendment was proposed and adopted. All of the buildings that exceed the 1,000 square -foot maximum are legal nonconforming. Hart Variance Request Planning Case 07-28 November 20, 2007 Page 6 of 7 The applicant's situation is unusual due to the fact that they do not have an attached garage in addition to the detached accessory structure. The detached accessory structure is their primary garage in which they park their vehicles. Staff is sympathetic to the applicant's request to add on to their detached garage; however, this is not considered to be a hardship according to City Code. The applicant is able to construct an addition to their garage within the guidelines of the City Code. Should the Planning Commission approve this variance, the following issues must be addressed: the applicant must get a building permit prior to construction and findings of fact would need to be created to support the approval. This could set a precedent within the A2 and RR districts to request a variance from the recently adopted ordinance, simply because the ordinance was changed and the property owner could no longer construct an accessory structure larger than 1,000 square feet. FINDINGS The Planning Commission shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre-existing standards in this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet these criteria. Finding. The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, and a two -car garage are currently constructed on the site. An expansion to the detached garage can be constructed in compliance with city code. The structures exceeding the 1,000 square feet within 500 feet of the subject site are legal nonconforming. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. Finding. The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the RR zoning district. City Code was changed in May of 2007 limiting the size of a detached accessory structure in the RR district to 1,000 square feet, due to the influx of home occupations being run out of many detached accessory structures. C. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Finding. The purpose of the variation is not based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, the applicant wishes to have a woodworking shop as well as extra storage space. Hart Variance Request Planning Case 07-28 November 20, 2007 Page 7 of 7 d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding. The alleged hardship of exceeding the 1,000 square -foot maximum accessory structure is a self-created hardship. The desire for the proposed addition can be constructed within the guidelines of City Code. The applicant has reasonable use of the property, a single-family house and a two -car garage. e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Finding. The variance may not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. The parcel is 2.5 acres in size and has a natural berm along Homestead Lane, which screens the garage. Thus, the addition will have minimal impact on the neighboring properties. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Finding: The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets. The addition is within the required setbacks and impervious surface requirements of the property. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-28, for a 177 square -foot variance from the maximum 1,000 square -foot detached accessory structure for an addition to a detached garage on Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition, based on the findings of fact in the staff report" ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced copy of lot survey. 4. Renderings of proposed addition. 5. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. gAplan\2007 planning cases\07-28 hart variance\vatiance reportAm CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND ACTION IN RE: Application of John and Cindy Hart for a 177 square- foot variance from the 1,000 square -foot size limitation for an addition to a 725 square- foot detached garage — Planning Case No. 07-28. On November 20, 2007, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the Application of John and Cindy Hart for a 177 square -foot variance for an addition to an existing detached garage at 951 Homestead Lane, located in the Rural Residential District (RR) on Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance that was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential (RR). 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential -Large Lot (2.5 acre minimum, 1/10 acre outside MUSA). 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition. 4. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, and a two -car garage are currently constructed on the site. An expansion to the detached garage can be constructed in compliance with city code. The structures exceeding the 1,010 square feet within 500 feet of the subject site are legal nonconforming b. The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the RR zoning district. City Code was change in May of 2007 limiting the size of a detached accessory structure in the RR district to 1,000 square feet, due to the influx of home occupations being run out of many detached accessory structures. c. The purpose of the variation is not based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, the applicant wishes to have a woodworking shop as well as extra storage space. d. The alleged hardship of exceeding the 1,000 square -foot maximum accessory structure is a self-created hardship. The desire for the proposed addition can be constructed within the guidelines of City Code. The applicant has reasonable use of the property, a single-family house and a two -car garage. e. The variance may not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. The parcel is 2.5 acres in size and has a natural berm along Homestead Lane, which screens the garage. Thus, the addition will have minimal impact on the neighboring properties. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets. The addition is within the required setbacks and impervious surface requirements of the property. 5. The planning report #07-28 Variance dated November 20, 2007, prepared by Angie Auseth, et al, is incorporated herein. ACTION "The Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-28, for a 177 square -foot variance from the maximum 1,000 square -foot detached accessory structure for an addition to a detached garage on Lot 2, Block 3, Pioneer Hills Addition, based on the findings of fact in the staff report." 2007. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 20th day of November, CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION ON gAplan\2007 planning cases\07-28 hart varianc6fiindings of factdoc `A PLEASE PRINT CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard — P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 — (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Planning Case No. CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED OCT 1 9 2007 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT Applicant Name and Address: Owner Name and Address: 'le ff N X50/4 11,10A&V Ott G/!..//, y HI*17-7 —LIL.)A 9_T1 HOME 57 0 AiL/ Contact: D N Contact: 4LION ° 9= G lLt al Phone: 3S2, *525 Fax: 6 /2.33'2.452 hone:9 4,T(o• 3009 Fax: Email: t7_1000'fhj0✓DfIAf3/C��/.�o/-t Email: G.c/Hf�?® 1/lS/.GDM_ NOTE: Consultation with City staff is required prior to submittal, including review of development plans Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Interim Use Permit (IUP) Non -conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development* Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review (SPR)* Subdivision* Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC) K Variance (VAR) Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign — $200 (City to install and remove) X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** - $50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes 8 Bounds - $450 Minor SUB .. 00 TOTAL FEE $ An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant prior to the public hearing. *Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8'/Z" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital copy in TIFF -Group 4 (*.tif) format. **Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. SCANNED PROJECT NAME: Xit34T CaA44&C X0,04"I LOCATION: '75/' k16 /-'�&S LAA'`E/ g LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 56Zj-7o^/• �(/ O ��/VS•�// p •�rPF- p� 4tAaE.' 0.03 G oT.' D02Q p�jpGOG�:�J©O3 �G�% .' 2S�/D ��N�Hacs TOTAL ACREAGE: T7 �/ /� D x L — Cy IC: " t I C, WETLANDS PRESENT: YES NO PRESENT ZONING: AUM L i &•�1 L' REQUESTED ZONING: VA&&I "e M4 t-'h/GAxLIoGp 6A,G4Cre PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: /s �oe /� 70 IW�� a�s%� ��i7��y,/ Off' �iegX//Tr¢T�Y �SS3-�'. f•T_ ND1�: fLff1 S� � /%r?/L G/57 of�pr/A«ts�' NE7laf/O,e.S To: c ///ffFPT ©1!/S/.co rt. This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of Signature df Fee Owner GApLANWorms0evelopment Review Application.DOC 10-167-0-7 Date Date Rev. 12/05 SCARNED Ilk DESIGN ARCHITECTS October 18, 2007 514 North City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 3rd Street Commissioners, Council Members, et al On behalf of Homeowners John & Cindy Hart, 951 Homestead Lane, I would like to submit this letter along with visual documentation in support of granting a variance for this property. Studio 203 When John & Cindy purchased their land in 1987 and built the existing home in 1998, there were NO covenants in this neighborhood. In fact, this was one of many reasons why they purchased this particular parcel. Now 20 years later the City of Chanhassen has modified it's Minneapolis ordinance, for reasons that should not affect the Harts. Having planned this project for several years, John & Cindy are now in the position to finance it. As you can see from the enclosed, they have no intention of creating a pole bam from which they could conduct business or agricultural use. Actually, it's just the opposite. Minnesota 55401 They will soon be empty nesters, approaching retirement and are looking for additional space for their numerous hobbies and storage of their children's possessions while they are away at college and/or traversing the revolving door as they transition to independence. Telephone: The hardship in this situation is related to the unique fact that the Hart's garage is detached. Nineteen years ago they chose to build a detached garage for health reasons. If their garage was attached, this extension would not require a variance, nor would building a second structure the size of the proposed addition. Failing to grant this variance would be putting 612.332.4525 them at an unfair disadvantage relative to residents with attached garages. Granting this variance, due to the limited generality of the circumstances would not compromise the intent behind its creation. Additionally, as you can see from the enclosed photos, how little the impact there will be on Facsimile: the surrounding area for either those using Homestead Lane, or the neighbors to either side of the Harts. The color differences shown are only to highlight the addition for your review. Actual colors will match the existing structure. 612.332.4526 Thank you for your consideration, and we look forward to your favorable decision. Resp*Designhitects www.jdadesign.com Johnl, Founder, NCARB JDA nc. Copy To: File October 25, 2007 To whom it may concern, In reviewing the documents submitted for our variance application, we realized that we have not responded to all of the criteria by which the planning commission bases its decisions. We are therefore, submitting this addendum. Criteria and responses: 1. That the literal enforcement of this Chapter would cause undue hardship. "Undue hardship' means the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use included a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow proliferation of variance, but to recognize that in developed neighborhoods pre-existing standards exist. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing from them meet this criteria. We believe failing to grant this variance request constitutes an undue hardship largely due to the fact that we would be prevented from pursuing a desired use of our property primarily because of a decision made 20 years ago to build a detached garage coupled with the very recently established ordinance regarding accessory structures. If our garage was attached, we could add the desire space or build an accessory building of the desired size without even requesting a variance. John wishes to pursue woodworking as a hobby, which requires a large work area. To add only the space allowable by the new ordinance would not provide sufficient space for the pursuit of this hobby. In addition, a review of the list of neighbors within 500 feet of our property, demonstrates that our addition would be consistent with pre-existing standards. Six of the properties on the list have large accessory buildings in addition to their attached garages, some with more than one accessory building. Hardship also ensues because we have been planning this project for years and are just now able financially to move forward, unfortunately only months after the passage of the new ordinance. Failure to acknowledge the uniqueness of our situation with a detached garage would create a "hardship" that others are unlikely to experience. 2. That the condition upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. Detached garages are not common, therefore basing the variance on this unique characteristic is not likely to occur in many other properties in this zoning classification. 3. That the alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. While we made the decision to detach our garage, the decision was made 20 years ago at a time when this ordinance did not exist, nor were there any covenants to prevent this addition throughout that time. Therefore, this hardship should not be construed as "self-created". 4. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. The purpose of the variation request is simply to provide space for a personal hobby, not to increase the value of the property or operate a business. 5. That the granting of the hardship will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. Clearly, there would be no detriment to the public welfare or injury to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. As is obvious from the computer generated renderings of this proposed addition to our garage, most people would not even realize it had occurred. 6. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Clearly, this tasteful addition to our garage, which only exceeds the recently adopted accessory structure size limitations by approximately 250 sq. feet will not have any of the negative effects listed in 116. Sincerely, Cynthia and John Hart 951 Homestead Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 952-496-3009 Z s Erc d O o z Z LOW 93 pp I 1 T i pill" 5WOL 4 j133'i i Ii€ou7wI 8 if i� I a w w Aerial Photo Additions and Renovations to 951 Homestead Ln K E Y JDA Design Architects Oct 2007 A AN 0 Existing - View From Street Proposed - View From Street. Showing Proposed Garage Addition Additions and Renovations to 951 Homestead Ln O JDA Design Architects Oct 2007 Existing - View From Street Proposed - View From Street. Showing Proposed Garage Addition Additions and Renovations to 951 Homestead Ln O JDA Design Architects Oct 2007 CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on November 8, 2007, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for the Hart Variance Request — Planning Case 2007-28 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��layof NruCrn)cr , 2007. Notary Public ti K en J. E el ardt, Il puty Clerk wl�owwKIM T.' �"""" 3 -_e MEUWISSEN y Notary public -Minnesota My Commission Expires Jan 31, 2010 Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not ' start until later in the evening, depending on the order of theagenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for a variance to exceed the maximum detached Proposal: accessory structure size to construct an addition to an existing detached garage on property zoned Rural Residential RR Applicant: JDA Desi n Architects Owner: John & C" dy Hart Property 951 Homestead 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 What Happens public hearing through the following steps: What Happens 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. at the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/plan/07-28.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Questions & Auseth by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1132. 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. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments lake a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/industrial. • Minnesota Slate Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not ' start until later in the evening,depending on the order of theagenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for a variance to exceed the maximum detached Proposal: accessory structure size to construct an addition to an existing detached garage on property zoned Rural Residential RR Applicant: JDA Desi n Architects Owner: John & Cindy Hart Property 951 Homestead 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/serv/plan/07-28.htmi. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Auseth by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Questions & Phone at 952 -227-1132. 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 PI Inning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commerciaUndustrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokespersonvrepresentative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. This map is neither a legally reconded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sc umes regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, thmring or any other purpose requiring exacting measu em rid of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepancies are found please confect 952-227-1107. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §666.03, Subtl. 21 (200(i), and the user of this rrep acknowledges that the City shall no be liable for any carriages, and expressly waives all chiufa, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hod harmless the City from any and all claim brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arse out of the users access or use of data provided. This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, State and federal offices and other Sources regaining me area shown, and is to De used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrent that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does not represent mat the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. 6 emors or discrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107. The preceding dsclaimer is pro riled pursuant to Minnesota Statues §466.03, $Obit. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all cirinn, and agrees to defend Indennity, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third pates which arse Out of the users access or use of data provided. JOHN C & JACKIE J DANIELS LORI L LARSON RONALD L & KOLLEEN M BROWN 1111 HOMESTEAD LN 1051 HOMESTEAD LN 9650 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8613 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8611 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8605 ROBERT F ERLER & JULIE K MILLER-ERLER 9600 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8605 KAREN KAY HENRICKSON 9651 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8605 PETER A DIRKS 900 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN. MN 55317-8608 CHARLES E & SANDRA R WORM 760 96TH ST W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8603 JOHNNIE J MEYERING & ELAINE A GERTKEN 1050 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8634 PETER A & JERILYN M SCHWALEN 1001 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8611 WENCES M HORAK ETAL TRUSTEES OF TRUST 9700 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8637 THOMAS J & SHARON L MESCHKE 9701 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8637 JOHN E & CYNTHIA N HART 951 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8609 STEVEN J & SANDRA R KADISAK DAVID D & STEPHANIE J VIEAU BLUFF CREEK GOLF ASSOC 810 PIONEER TRL 901 HOMESTEAD LN 1025 CREEKWOOD DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8673 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8609 CHASKA , MN 55318 -9647 Public Hearing Notification Area (500 feet) Hart Variance 14) 951 Homestead Lane City of Chanhassen Planning Case 07-28 SUBJECT PROPERTY P,a , All �W October 18, 2007 514 North City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 3rd Street Commissioners, Council Members, et al On behalf of Homeowners John & Cindy Hart, 951 Homestead Lane, I would like to submit this letter along with visual documentation in support of granting a variance for this property. Studio 203 When John & Cindy purchased their land in 1987 and built the existing home in 1998, there were NO covenants in this neighborhood. In fact, this was one of many reasons why they purchased this particular parcel. Now 20 years later the City of Chanhassen has modified it's Minneapolis ordinance, for reasons that should not affect the Harts. Having planned this project for several years, John & Cindy are now in the position to finance it. As you can see from the enclosed, they have no intention of creating a pole barn from which they could conduct business or agricultural use. Actually, it's just the opposite. Minnesota 55401 They will soon be empty nesters, approaching retirement and are looking for additional space for their numerous hobbies and storage of their children's possessions while they are away at college and/or traversing the revolving door as they transition to independence. Telephone: The hardship in this situation is related to the unique fact that the Hart's garage is detached. Nineteen years ago they chose to build a detached garage for health reasons. If their garage was attached, this extension would not require a variance, nor would building a second structure the size of the proposed addition. Failing to grant this variance would be putting 612.332.4525 them at an unfair disadvantage relative to residents with attached garages. Granting this variance, due to the limited generality of the circumstances would not compromise the intent behind its creation. Additionally, as you can see from the enclosed photos, how little the impact there will be on Facsimile: the surrounding area for either those using Homestead Lane, or the neighbors to either side of the Harts. The color differences shown are only to highlight the addition for your review. Actual colors will match the existing structure. 612.332.4526 Thank you for www.ldadesign.com John 94ma JDA Design Copy To: File consideration, and we look forward to your favorable decision. al, Founder, NCARB Inc. SCANNED Aerial Photo Additions and Renovations to 951 Homestead Ln KEY JDA Design Architects Oct 2007 SCANNED k 57, K`- 75 '5- m Neighbor's Front Yard OWL Existing - View From Street Proposed - View From Street. Showing Proposed Garage Addition Additions and Renovations to 951 Homestead Ln 2 JDA Design Architects Oct 2007 Existing - View From Street r Proposed - View From Street. Showing Proposed Garage Addition Additions and Renovations to 951 Homestead Ln O JDA Design Architects Oct 2007 SCANNED Existing - View From Street Proposed - View From Street. Showing Proposed Garage Addition Additions and Renovations to 951 Homestead Ln V JDA Design Architects Oct 2007 v SCANNED JOHN C & JACKIE J DANIELS LORI L LARSON RONALD L & KOLLEEN M BROWN 1111 HOMESTEAD LN 1051 HOMESTEAD LN 9650 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8613 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8611 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -6605 ROBERT F ERLER & JULIE K MILLER-ERLER 9500 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8605 KAREN KAY HENRICKSON 9651 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8605 PETER A DIRKS 900 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8608 CHARLES E & SANDRA R WORM 760 96TH ST W CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -5603 JOHNNIE J MEYERING & ELAINE A GERTKEN 1050 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8634 PETER A & JERILYN M SCHWALEN 1001 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8611 WENCES M HORAK ETAL TRUSTEES OF TRUST 9700 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -9637 THOMAS J & SHARON L MESCHKE 9701 FLINTLOCK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8637 JOHN E & CYNTHIA N HART 951 HOMESTEAD LN CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8609 STEVEN J & SANDRA R KADISAK DAVID D & STEPHANIE J VIEAU BLUFF CREEK GOLF ASSOC 810 PIONEER TRL 901 HOMESTEAD LN 1025 CREEKWOOD DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8673 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8609 CHASKA, MN 55318 -9647 Date: October 22, 2007 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department By: Angie Auseth, Planner I Subject: HART VARIANCE: Request for a variance to exceed the maximum detached accessory structure size to construct an addition to an existing detached garage on property zoned Rural Residential (RR) located at 951 Homestead Lane. Applicant: JDA Design Architects. Owners: John & Cindy Hart. Planning Case: 07-28 The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on October 19, 2007. The 60day review period ends December 18, 2007. In order for us to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission and City Council review, we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on traffic circulation, existing and proposed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need for acquiring public lands or easements for park sites, street extensions or improvements, and utilities. Where specific needs or problems exist, we would like to have a written report to this effect from the agency concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on November 20, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than November 9, 2007. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. 1. City Departments: a. City Engineer b. City Attorney c. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official L Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 3. MN Dept. of Transportation 4. MN Dept. of Natural Resources 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 6. U.S. Fish & Wildlife 7. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services 8. Watershed District Engineer a. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek b. Lower Minnesota River c. Mirmehaha Creek 9. Telephone Company (Qwest or Sprint/United) 10. Electric Company (Xcel Energy or MN Valley) 11. Mediacom 12. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco SCANNED Location Map Hart Variance 951 Homestead Lane City of Chanhassen Planning Case 07-28 h � to a, m a n TT W. ssms i 4 m 0 � drew w 3 2 S R rTrM(H"ry Riweer Tmil (Hwy 14� m SUBJECT PROPERTY 3 E o, o ,o m m m z e � I N �I � Q W Jim K yR I L (Q 01 -g9tf5- 1 11 ti �E M U z ? 1'- c Ij8 m p FW E !+#e ° FA 1 69oi 0 � � 's ayf54sl o e tt _ �E M I U z ? rn r > (L L) W O r 0 Iz z e Q LU _ p I CITY OF CHANHASSEN P 0 BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 10/22/2007 4:10 PM Receipt No. 0055726 CLERK: katie PAYEE: JOHN HART 951 HOMESTEAD LANE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Hart Variance Planning Case 07-28 ------------------------------------------------------- Use & Variance 200.00 Recording Fees 50.00 Total 250.00 Cash 0.00 Check 17916 250.00 Change 5 I1 SCANNED HART VARIANCE - PLANNING CASE 07-28 $200 Variance $50 Escrow for Filing Fees $250 Cynthia Hart Check 17916 =CANNEL MEMORANDUM TO: Angie Auseth, Planner I FROM: Terrance Jeffery, Water Resources Coordinator DATE: October 23, 2007 RE: Hart Variance (Planning Case 07-28) I have reviewed the plans prepared by JDA Design Architects dated October 18, 2007. In general there is no significant water resource concerns associated with the proposed garage addition. Based upon this review I have the following comments and recommendations: 1. No SWMP Fees would apply to this project. 2. There are no wetland features which would be directly impacted as a result of the proposed structure. 3. The proposed foot print is below the minimum threshold which would necessitate that a NPDES Stromwater Permit for Construction Activities be obtained. 4. An erosion control plan should be developed and included for review. 5. Any additional impervious surfaces such as extending the walkway should be discouraged. Conditions: In addition to any conditions recommended by the Chanhassen Planning Commission and City Council: 1. The location of down gradient perimeter erosion control BMPs should be indicated on the site plan and installed appropriately. 2. Chanhassen City Detail 393-5300 should be included with the plan. This concludes my review of the above plan. Should you have any questions please contact meat extension 1168. Thank you. 13 • :: \IN lul TO: Angie Auseth, Planner I FROM: Jerritt Mohn, Building Official DATE: October 23, 2007 SUBJ: Review of a request for a variance at 951 Homestead Lane Planning Case: 07-28 I have reviewed the request for the above variance and have the following comments: 1) Building Permit required. 2) Structure must comply with Minnesota State Building Code. G/plan/2007 Planning Cases/07-28 Hart Variance/buildingofficialco=mts.dm PROPOSED GARX ADDITION 455 sgrt --t NOMEFE,4[) LANE -216,00 - sr Ir. / EXISTING I ? GARAGE EXIBTM � 125 50. FT DdVEU74Y i �� Exp WALK / EXISTING i Ou 951 HOME TE L 1 2 STORY O Qi ---- I Y1 t I I I @ 15? m @ � I r I z II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EA5EME14 1 -- -� ` GOUNiY �D NO. 14 Section: 26 Township: 116 Range: 023 Lot: 002 Block: 003 Plat: 25610 PIONEER HILLS O- PRCPC5E[ SITE PLAN SLO SCALE: I" = 30'-0" — — E LINE SCALE: 1" = I0'-0" TREE LINE IM] DESIGN ARCHITECTS 514 North 3rd Street, Studio 203 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Telephone: 612.332.4525 Facsimile: 612.332.4526 www.jdadesign.com CONSULTANTS: ADDITIONS TO: HART RESIDENCE 951 HOMESTEAD LANE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly REGISTERED ARCHITECT under the laws of the State of Minnesota. signature date name registration number JOHN D ANDERSON 23628 REVISION HISTORY: description date ISSUED FOR ZONING VARIANGEB-07 ISSUED FOR: ZONING VARIANCE ISSUE DATE: 18 OCTOBER 2007 DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: WW/JDA JDA SHEET TITLE: SITE PLANS SHEET NUMBER: V1.0 a J D A D E S I G N A R C H I T E C T S\ `m N 2 GAIRAGE PLAN NORTH/ VLI SCALE: 1/4" - 1'-0" NEW l EXISTINR SOUTH NORTH NEW GARAGE ROOF EXI5TIN65 ROOF NEW Y-0" MAN DOOR NORTH 4 SOUTH GARAGE ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1/4" = I'-0" EXI5TING ROOF . --- I MAN REPLDOOR ACE XT'G EXISTING j NEW WEST GARAGE EL=EVATION SCALE: 3/16" = I'-0" NEW GARAGE ROOF DESIGN ARCHITECTS 514 North 3rd Street, Studio 203 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Telephone: 612.332.4525 Facsimile: 612.332.4526 www.jdadesign.com CONSULTANTS: ADDITIONS TO: HART RESIDENCE 951 HOMESTEAD LANE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duty REGISTERED ARCHITECT under the laws of the State of Minnesota. signature date name JOHN D ANDERSON registration number 23628 REVISION HISTORY: description date ISSUED FOR ZONING VARIANCES -07 ISSUED FOR: ZONING VARIANCE ISSUE DATE: 18 OCTOBER 2007 DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: WW/JDA JDA SHEET TITLE: GARAGE PLAN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SHEET NUMBER: V1.1 �-/ ' ® J D A D E S I G N A R C H I T E C T S\ PROPOSED GARAGE ADDITION 455 sgrt \ 22'-8" HOMESTEAD LANE —216.00 — 32' -H EXISTING T GARAGE %175 SQ FT STM DDpVSAY 40• EMTMG cow - WALK _.l. —__ - EXISTING I C 951 HOME T —�2 STORY: T1 -- TREE LNlE —,i LNE l w `Q m o z I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EA01ENT �- GOUNiY p4D N0. 14 Section: 26 Township: 116 Range: 023 Lot: 002 Block: 003 Plat: 25610 PIONEER HILLS PIRCF06ED SITE FLAN SL0 SGALE: I" = 30'-0" E L INE MEN Will! 5GALE: P - 16-0" TREE LINE DESIGN ARCHITECTS 514 North 3rd Street, Studio 203 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Telephone: 612.332.4525 Facsimile: 612.332.4526 www.idadesign.com CONSULTANTS: ADDITIONS TO: HART RESIDENCE 951 HOMESTEAD LANE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly REGISTERED ARCHITECT under the laws of the State of Minnesota. signature date name registration number JOHN D ANDERSON 23628 REVISION HISTORY: description date ISSUED FOR ZONING VARIAME3-07 ISSUED FOR: ZONING VARIANCE ISSUE DATE: 18 OCTOBER 2007 DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: WW/JDA JDA SHEET TITLE: SITE PLANS SHEET NUMBER V1.0 O J D A D E S I G N A R C H IT E C T S\ co N °4 N GARAGE PLAN SCALE: 1/4" - 1'-0" SOUTH , EX15TING 1 NEW NORTH EX15TING ROOF NORTH 4 5OUTH GARAGE ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1/4" = P-0" IJEST GARAGE ELEVATION SCALE: 3/16" = P-0" NEW GARAGE ROOF Dr DESIGN ARCHITECTS 514 North 3rd Street, Studio 203 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Telephone: 612.332.4525 Facsimile: 612.332.4526 www.jdadesign.com CONSULTANTS: ADDITIONS TO: HART RESIDENCE 951 HOMESTEAD LANE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duty REGISTERED ARCHITECT under the laws of the State of Minnesota. signature date name registration number JOHN D ANDERSON 23628 REVISION HISTORY: description date ISSUED FOR ZONING VARIAMEM7 ISSUED FOR: ZONING VARIANCE ISSUE DATE: 18 OCTOBER 2007 DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: WW/JDA JDA SHEET TITLE: GARAGE PLAN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SHEET NUMBER: V1.1 © J D A D E S I G N A R C H I T E C T S\