The URL can be used to link to this page

CAS-33_MONSON, STEVET, • r� oy-33 Document No. OFFICE OF THE A 402 602 COUNTY RECORDER IIIIIIIIII VIII VIII IIIIIIIIII IIII IIII CARVER COUNTY, ecN 1MINNESOTA F e: $ 9 50 Certified Recorded on 12-01-2004 at 04:00 ❑ AM VfPM III 111 200II�2-01IVi�V�uIIIVCal nJr. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, NID iNESOTA VARIANCE 04-33 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants the following variance: The Planning Commission approves Variance 04-33 for the construction of a garage/storage building in a bluff as shown on the plans stamped `Received June 22, 2004' prepared by Minnetonka Design, Inc. 2. Procerty. The variance is for property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as follows: Parcel I, Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge, 8850 Audubon Road 3. Conditions. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions: A building permit must be applied for within one year of approval of the variance or it shall become void. 2. The proposed addition must be built per plans stamped "Received June 22, 2004." 3. The applicant must submit plans for the ramp before proceeding with construction. 4. An after -the -fact building permit for grading must be applied for. 5. The graded slope must be entirely reinforced with a retaining wall which will require a building permit; or must be restored to a slope less than 3:1. 6. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: SCANNED 0 0 r Tof Slope Type 1e Time (maximum time an area can remain unvegetated when area is not actively being worked) Steeper than 3:1 7 Days 10:1 to 3:1 14 Days Flatter than 10:1 21 Days These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man-made system that discharges to any surface water. Permanent native vegetation shall be installed on the slopes to minimize the potential for future slope failure. 8. Submit an existing topographic survey signed by an RIS (registered land surveyor). The survey must show the following: a. Location of the retaining wall with top and bottom elevations. b. Driveway location and slope. C. Garage floor elevation. 9. The driveway must be hard -surfaced and comply with City code sec. 20- 1122 (attached). 10. No home occupation or business use will be permitted in the existing attached garage or proposed detached garagetstorage building, as stated in City Code 20-977: "...No garage or accessory buildings except accessory agriculture buildings existing on February 19, 1987 shall be used for any home occupation." 11. The applicant shall submit for staff approval and construct a French drainage system, along with gutters on the garagetstorage building. 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: October 19, 2004 (SEAL) STATE OF MINNESOTA ( ss COUNTY OF CARVER CITY OF CHANHASSEN BY: i Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor( AND: L /—, t odd Gerhardt, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this !L-Mday of , 2004 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. NO PUBLM tq KHREN J. ENG K;PWtapi Public h5inne �� DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 gAp1an\2004 planning cases\04-33 - n son variance -8850 audubon ro d\Tmording.doc CITY OF CHANHAEN 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 ORRANSMITTAL 11 Sue Nelson RE: Document I ® Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Change Order ❑ Pay Request ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION 1 10/19/04 04-33 Variance - 8850 Audubon Road (Parcel I, Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge) - Steve & Mary Pat Monson ❑ FORBIDS DUE THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ® For your use ❑ As requested ❑ For review and comment ❑ FORBIDS DUE REMARKS COPY TO: Steve Monson ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints ® For Recording ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US SIGNED: Kim Pleuwisson, (952) 227-1107 IF enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. $'..."Lu CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA VARIANCE 04-33 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants the following variance: The Planning Commission approves Variance 04-33 for the construction of a garage/storage building in a bluff as shown on the plans stamped `Received June 22, 2004' prepared by Minnetonka Design, Inc. 2. Property. The variance is for property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as follows: Parcel I, Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge, 8850 Audubon Road 3. Conditions. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions: A building permit must be applied for within one year of approval of the variance or it shall become void. 2. The proposed addition must be built per plans stamped "Received June 22, 2004." 3. The applicant must submit plans for the ramp before proceeding with construction. 4. An after -the -fact building permit for grading must be applied for. 5. The graded slope must be entirely reinforced with a retaining wall which will require a building permit; or must be restored to a slope less than 3:1. 6. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man-made system that discharges to any surface water. 7. Permanent native vegetation shall be installed on the slopes to minimize the potential for future slope failure. 8. Submit an existing topographic survey signed by an RIS (registered land surveyor). The survey must show the following: a. Location of the retaining wall with top and bottom elevations. b. Driveway location and slope. C. Garage floor elevation. 9. The driveway must be hard -surfaced and comply with City code sec. 20- 1122 (attached). 10. No home occupation or business use will be permitted in the existing attached garage or proposed detached garage/storage building, as stated in City Code 20-977: "...No garage or accessory buildings except accessory agriculture buildings existing on February 19, 1987 shall be used for any home occupation." 11. The applicant shall submit for staff approval and construct a French drainage system, along with gutters on the garage/storage building. 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: October 19, 2004 2 Time (maximum time an area can remain unvege; ted when area is not active) worked Steeper than 3:1 7 Da s 10:1 to 3:1 14 Days Flatter than 10:1 21 Days These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man-made system that discharges to any surface water. 7. Permanent native vegetation shall be installed on the slopes to minimize the potential for future slope failure. 8. Submit an existing topographic survey signed by an RIS (registered land surveyor). The survey must show the following: a. Location of the retaining wall with top and bottom elevations. b. Driveway location and slope. C. Garage floor elevation. 9. The driveway must be hard -surfaced and comply with City code sec. 20- 1122 (attached). 10. No home occupation or business use will be permitted in the existing attached garage or proposed detached garage/storage building, as stated in City Code 20-977: "...No garage or accessory buildings except accessory agriculture buildings existing on February 19, 1987 shall be used for any home occupation." 11. The applicant shall submit for staff approval and construct a French drainage system, along with gutters on the garage/storage building. 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: October 19, 2004 2 0 0 (SEAL) STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF CHANIIASSEN M Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor AND: L � —Z)Y- 71"odd Gerhardt, City Manager ( ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 10Aday of 4u-e� 2004 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�ft PUBLM g _`::=w KARFN J. EN6EeHPpnT 'Pub v "4 nne ala Noi2p 051 My y4 ,r.... , 7yyFiitdV+� City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 9.\plau\2004 planning mm\04-33 - nvns variance -8850 audubou rond\recording.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Boz 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952 227.11 DO Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952-227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Hunte 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: 952227.1130 Fax 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us 0 November 2, 2004 Steve & Mary Pat Monson 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Variance, 8850 Audubon Road — Planning Case 1104-33 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Monson: This letter is to formally notify you that on October 19, 2004, the Chanhassen Planning Commission approved the following motion: "Planning Commission approves Variance 04-33 for the construction of a garagetstorage building in a bluff as shown on the plans stamped `Received June 22, 2004' prepared by Minnetonka Design Inc. with the following conditions: 1. A building permit must be applied for within one year of approval of the variance or it shall become void. 2. The proposed addition must be built per plans stamped "Received June 22, 2004." 3. The applicant must submit plans for the ramp before proceeding with construction. 4. An after -the -fact building permit for grading must be applied for. 5. The graded slope must be entirely reinforced with a retaining wall which will require a building permit; or must be restored to a slope less than 3:1. 6. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man-made system that discharges to any surface water. Permanent native vegetation shall be installed on the slopes to minimize the potential for future slope failure. The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A gest place to live, work, and play. Time (maximum time an area can remain unvegetated Type of Slope when area is not actively being worked) Steeper than 3:1 7 Days 10:1 to 3:1 14 Days Flatter than 10:1 21 Days These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man-made system that discharges to any surface water. Permanent native vegetation shall be installed on the slopes to minimize the potential for future slope failure. The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A gest place to live, work, and play. Steve & Mary Pat Monson* November 2, 2004 Page 2 8. Submit an existing topographic survey signed by an RLS (registered land surveyor). The survey must show the following: a. Location of the retaining wall with top and bottom elevations. b. Driveway location and slope. C. Garage floor elevation. 9. The driveway must be hard -surfaced and comply with City code sec. 20-1122 (attached). 10. No home occupation or business use will be permitted in the existing attached garage or proposed detached garage/storage building, as stated in City Code 20-977: "...No garage or accessory buildings except accessory agriculture buildings existing on February 19, 1987 shall be used for any home occupation." 11. The applicant shall work with staff to construct a French drainage system, along with gutters on the garage/storage building. Plans must be approved by staff. A $50.00 recording fee must be submitted to our office. The variance shall become void within one (1) year following the approval, October 19, 2005, unless a building permit has been issued and construction begins on the garage/storage building. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 952-227-1132 or by email at jmetzer@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. Sincerely, osh Metzer Planning Department cc: Matt Saam Assistant City Engineer Lori Haak, Water Resources Coordinator Steve Torrell, Building Official g.Nplan\2004 planning c \04-33 - monson variance -8850 audubon roadVetter of approval.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND ACTION IN RE: Application of Steve and Pat Monson for a variance to construct a garagetstorage building in a bluff. Planning Case No. 2004-33 On October 19, 2004, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Steve and Pat Monson for a variance to construct a garage/storage building in a bluff located at 8850 Audubon Road. 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 of MUSA). 3. The legal description of the property is: Parcel I, Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge. 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. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship due to the topography of the property. A reasonable use is defined as the use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet. Because the property is in a RR zoning district and has an area of 2.5 acres it is reasonable for the applicant to have a second garage. b. The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the RR zoning district and bluff impact zones. c. The garagelstorage building will increase the value of the property. However, staff does not believe that is the sole reason for the request. d. The property contains extreme contours and has very little buildable area. • 11 e. The granting of a variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 5. The planning report #04-33 Variance dated October 19, 2004, prepared by Josh Metzer, et al, is incorporated herein. ACTION The Chanhassen Planning Commission approves the variance to allow grading and the construction of a garagetstorage building on a bluff. PII ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 19`s day of October, CHANHASSEN P G COMMISSION BY: Planning Commission Chairperson 0 Ll STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for a Variance to construct a garage/storage building on a bluff. LOCATION: 8850 Audubon Road Parcel I, Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge APPLICANT: Steve & Mary Pat Monson 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: Rural Residential (RR) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential —Large Lot (2.5 Acre minimum 1/10 acre outside of MUSA) ACREAGE: 2.5 acre DENSITY: NA SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Request for a Variance for grading and the construction of a garagetstorage building in a bluff. The grading variance is after the fact. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi judicial decision. SCANNED 0 Location Map Monson Variance 8850 Audubon Road City of Chanhassen Planning Case No. 04-33 Subject Property Monson Variance • • Planning Case #04-33 October 19, 2004 Page 2 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing the construction of a garage/storage building in a bluff which has already been graded without a permit. The proposed garage/storage building would be located in a bluff. Two retaining walls, of approximately three feet in height, have been installed in the bluff. Grading in the bluff has taken place creating a building pad. A gravel driveway extending off of the original driveway leading to the building pad has been constructed. All of these improvements were made without a permit. APPLICABLE REGUATIONS CHAPTER 20, ARTICLE XXVIII. BLUFF PROTECTION Sec. 20-1400. Statement of intent. Development, excavation, clearcutting and other activities within the bluff impact zone may result in increased dangers of erosion, increased visibility to surrounding properties and thereby endanger the natural character of the land and jeopardize the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the city. To preserve the character of the bluff impact zone within the city, alteration to land or vegetation within the bluff area will not be permitted except as regulated by this article and by the regulations of the underlying zoning district where the property is located. Sec. 20-1401. Structure setbacks. (a) Structures, including, but not limited to, principal buildings, decks, and accessory buildings, except stairways and landings, are prohibited on the bluff and must be set back from the top of the bluff, the toe of the bluff, and the side of a bluff at least thirty (30) feet. Sec. 20-1404. Topographic alterations/grading and filling. An earthwork permit will be required for the movement of more that ten (10) cubic yards of material within bluff impact zones. The permit shall be granted if the proposed alteration does not adversely affect the bluff impact zone or other property. Topographic alterations/grading and filling within the bluff impact zone shall not be permitted to increase the rate of drainage. The drainage from property within the bluff impact zone may not be redirected without a permit from the city. Fill or excavated material shall not be placed in bluff impact zones. Sec. 20-1405. Roads, driveways and parking areas. Roads, driveways, and parking areas must meet structure setbacks and must not be placed within bluff impact zones when other reasonable and feasible placement alternatives exist. If no alternatives exist, they may be placed within these areas, and must be designed to not cause adverse impacts. BACKGROUND The properties of 8850 and 8900 Audubon Road were originally one parcel (Lot 2, Block 1, 8850 Audubon Road) as part of the Sun Ridge subdivision which was adopted by City Council on October 26, 2004. In Subdivision 96-19 (administrative) the Monson's purchased a small portion of land from the neighboring property to the south (lot 1, Block 1, 8950 Audubon Road) to make 8850 a 5 -acre parcel. 8850 and 8900 Monson Variance • • Planning Case #04-33 October 19, 2004 Page 3 Audubon Road were created by Subdivision 97-11 which was approved by City Council on October 26, 1998. The house at 8850 Audubon Road was constructed in 1990. The City received a building permit for a two-story garage/storage building on June 22, 2004. On June 29, 2004 planning staff reviewed the plans and noticed extreme contours on the property at which time the applicant was contacted to verify slopes and if a bluff existed. The applicant explained that a pad and a gravel driveway had already been created and retaining walls had been built. When staff received the revised registered land survey it reflected the existence of a bluff. Grading in the bluff had aheady taken place, including the construction of retaining walls. Staff explained to the applicant that we cannot approve the building permit. The options were to restore the bluff or apply for a variance with the understanding that staff would recommend denial since the applicant has reasonable use of the property and a hardship was not demonstrated. The applicant chose to proceed with the variance application. ANALYSIS The subject property is a 2.5 acre lot located at 8850 Audubon Road just north of Lyman Boulevard. The lot contains a single-family home, has an area of 108,900 square feet, and is zoned Rural Residential (RR). One area on the property has been identified as a bluff (i.e. slope greater than or equal to 30% and a rise in slope of at least 25 feet above the toe). Chanhassen City Code requires preservation of the bluff area. All structures are required to maintain a 30 -foot setback from the bluff and all grading must occur outside of the bluff impact zone (i.e., the bluff and land located within 20 feet from the top of the bluff). Two retaining walls, of approximately three feet in height, have been installed in the bluff. Grading in the bluff has taken place creating a building pad. A gravel driveway extending off of the original driveway leading to the building pad has been built. All of these improvements were made without a permit. Staff realizes that there is very little buildable area on the lot; however, in order for a variance to be approved the applicant must demonstrate a hardship. The property contains a single-family home and a three -stall garage. Often when an additional detached garage is added to a large lot they are used for home occupations; specifically contractors yards. These types of uses in a residential district are prohibited and are some of the most frequent sources of code violation complaints. The applicant has a reasonable use of the property; therefore, a hardship does not exist. Since the variance for grading is after the fact, staffs main concern is erosion and stability of the slope. It is staffs recommendation that the bluff be restored to a slope of 3:1. The applicant will need to work with the engineering department to arrive at an acceptable restoration plan. The plan shall also include re -vegetation of the slopes and erosion control blanket. The applicant informed staff that he was unaware of the bluff ordinance prohibiting grading within the bluffs. Staff is giving the applicant the benefit of the doubt, however, staff recommendation is restoration of all damage to the bluff. FINDINGS The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: Monson Variance • Planning Case #04-33 October 19, 2004 Page 4 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 this criteria. Finding: The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship because the property owner has reasonable use of the site. A reasonable use is defined as the use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet. In this case, because it is in a RR zoning district, a reasonable use is a single-family home with a two -stall garage (applicant has a three -stall garage). The property owner currently has reasonable use of the site. Approving this variance will depart downward from pre-existing standards and set a precedent. 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 and bluff impact zones. 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 garagetstorage building will increase the value of the property. However, staff does not believe that is the sole reason for the request. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding: The applicant has a reasonable use of the property having a single family home and a three -stall garage. Therefore, the applicant has not demonstrated a hardship to wan -ant a variance. 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: Development, excavation, clearcutting and other activities within the bluff impact zone may result in increased dangers of erosion, increased visibility to surrounding properties and thereby endanger the natural character of the land and jeopardize the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the city. The granting of a variance could result in degradation of the slope. It is staffs recommendation that the bluff be restored to a slope of 3:1. 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 public streets or increase the danger of fire or Monson Variance • • Planning Case #04-33 October 19, 2004 Page 5 endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission denies a variance for the construction of a garage/storage building in a bluff at 8850 Audubon Road, as shown on the plans stamped 'Received June 22, 2004' based on the findings of fact in the staff report and the following: 1. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship to wan -ant a variance. 2. The applicant has a reasonable use of the property." Should the Planning Commission choose to approve the variance, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: '"The Planning Commission approves Variance 04-33 for the construction of a garagetstorage building in a bluff as shown on the plans stamped 'Received June 22, 2004' with the following conditions: 1. A building permit must be applied for within one year of approval of the variance or it shall become void. 2. The proposed addition must be built per plans stamped "Received June 22, 2004." 3. The applicant must submit plans for the ramp before proceeding with construction. An after -the -fact building permit for grading must be applied for. 5. The graded slope must be entirely reinforced with a retaining wall which will require a building permit; or must be restored to a slope less than 3:1. 6. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (maximum time an area can remain unvegetated when area is not active) be' worked) Steeper than 3:1 7 Days 10:1 to 3:1 14 Das Flatter than 10:1 21 Days These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man-made system that discharges to any surface water. Monson Variance • • Planning Case #04-33 October 19, 2004 Page 6 Permanent native vegetation shall be installed on the slopes to minimize the potential for future slope failure. 8. Submit an existing topographic survey signed by an RIS (registered land surveyor). The survey must show the following: a. Location of the retaining wall with top and bottom elevations. b. Driveway location and slope. c. Garage floor elevation. 9. The driveway must be hard -surfaced and comply with City code sec. 20-1122 (attached). 10. No home occupation or business use will be permitted in the existing attached garage or proposed detached garage/storage building, as stated in City Code 20-977: "...No garage or accessory buildings except accessory agriculture buildings existing on February 19, 1987 shall be used for any home occupation." ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Letter from Steve and Pat Monson stamped "Received September 17, 2004". 4. Two (2) Lot Surveys. 5. Topographic Survey. 6. Architectural Plans. 7. Photos of the 8850 Audubon Road. 8. City Code section 20-1122. 9. Affidavit of Mailing Notice of Public Hearing. gAplan\2004 planning cases\04-33 - monson variance -8850 audubon mfttaff report - monson.dac 0 9 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND ACTION IN RE: Application of Steve and Pat Monson for a variance to construct a garage/storage building in a bluff. On October 19, 2004, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly schedule meeting to consider the application of Steve and Pat Monson for a variance to construct a garagetstorage building in a bluff located at 8850 Audubon Road. 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 I. 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 of MUSA). 3. The legal description of the property is: Parcel I, Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge. 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 because the property owner has reasonable use of the site. A reasonable use is defined as the use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet. In this case, because it is in a RR zoning district, a reasonable use is a single-family home with a two -stall garage. The property owner currently has reasonable use of the site. Approving this variance will depart downward from pre-existing standards and set a precedent. b. The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the RR zoning district and bluff impact zones. c. The garagetstorage building will increase the value of the property. However, staff does not believe that is the sole reason for the request. • C� d. The property contains a single-family home and a three -stall garage, therefore, the applicant has a reasonable use of the property and there is no hardship. e. The granting of a variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood 5. The planning report #04-33 Variance dated October 19, 2004, prepared by Josh Metzer, et al, is incorporated herein. ACTION The Chanhassen Planning Commission the variance to allow grading and the construction of a garage/storage building on a bluff. Mil M by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 11d' day of October, CHANHASSEN Planning Commission Planning Commission Chairperson 0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION '��" WI[/A�� ` •ice ��•• TELEPHONED, r i CITY OF CHANHASSEN ot4-33 RECEIVED SEP 17 2004 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT IMMA306, Y i\.►� r a. ADDRESS: IJ TELEPHONE: i r Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements Interim Use Permit Variance Non -conforming Use Permit Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development* Zoning Appeal Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Notification Sign Site Plan Review* X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** - $50 CUP/SPR/VAC/VAR/WAP/Metes & Bounds - $400 Minor SUB Subdivision* TOTAL FEE $ Mailing labels of all property owners within at least 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application -OR- the City can provide this list (Carver County properties only) for an additional fee to be invoiced to the applicant. If you would like the City to provide mailing labels, check this box Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. *Twenty-six (26) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an B'/2" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet. **Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT N LOCATION: Awk Ah LEGAL DESCRIPTION: TOTAL ACREAGE: a- `Jr WETLANDS PRESENT: YES NO PRESENT ZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: S - REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: AD kx� A U Ort b\ o) S This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owners Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowled li of Applicant C/ Date Signature of Fee Owner Date Application Received on f Fee Paid-137 Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Thursday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. GAplan\fo \Developm t Review Application.DOC • ` RECEIVED To: Chanhassen Planning Commission/Staff SEP 17 2004 From: Steve & Mary Pat Monson CIN OF CHANHASSEN Address: 8850 Audubon Road Re: Variance to build garage/storage on bluff We are requesting a variance to build on what is considered by Ordinance a bluff area, listed below are the issues concerning the property and why we feel this is the best possible place to locate the structure. Background Information: In 1997 we wanted to divided the 5 acres we owned into two- 2.5 acre lots as permitted by the city, the original plan was to divide the 5 acres north and south with a common driveway coming in off of Audubon at the south end of the property, which would have allowed flat area's for both lots. The city asked us to change the plotting of the 5 acres to run east and west, which is what we did. Now that leaves us with 2.5 acres almost entirely on what is considered a bluff. Our property is zoned RR, Rural Residential. We own 2.5 acres this acreage is surrounded on 3 sides by other property owners and Audubon Road, 90% of the property is on a hill. Our neighbors to the south and west also have 2.5 acre lots, the house to the north we believe is an acre lot. We believe there is only two other area's on our property that may not be considered bluff area's however there isn't access to those area's without crossing through someone else's property to get to it. We are asking for a variance to place a garage with storage just south of our existing driveway. We do not believe the properties in our same zone have the same issues we have. The purpose of the variance is to be able to use with reasonable expectation some of the 2.5 acreage that we own, i.e. out buildings, garages and other structure are within the limitations of the zoning in our area. Our hardship is created by the unique percentage of the property that is located on the bluff. We want to build this structure to store pool equipment and out door furniture that is currently being stored behind our house under tarps in the winter, which is directly below the hill from our neighbors to the north. We believe they would rather not view the tarps, the new structures would not be in view of their home at all. The neighbors to the south are far below the structure. The structure would not block or obstruct views from any of the neighbors. The structure does not impair any air flow, light source to other property owners. It does not add congestion to the street and it is not a fire danger or public safety issue. In closing, we do not believe the structure has any impact on our neighbors except to enclose what we already have stored in the back yard. It does not impact the hill, we did not take down any trees or create an erosion area. Due to the large tree next to the driveway on Audubon we do not believe anyone will see the garage from Audubon. We believe with our 2.5 acres it is with reasonable expectation to be able to build a structure that we can access. 1'NANK H. UAHUAHtLLt lana murveyoi, .._. 941-3031 6440 Flying Cloud Drives inuu awvcy.. Eden Prairie, MN 5534 �C�rt�ir�ctx �t �urU�� Survey For Steve Mo • Book Page File Ging 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: 361-0957 Description: Parcel I: That part of lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Carver County,Minnesota, described as lying Northeasterly of a line described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 353.03 feet Southerly of the Northeast corner of said Lot 2, thence North- westerly to a point on the westerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 130.50 feet Southerly from the Northwest corner of said Lot 2 and there terminating. Subject to a roadway easement over the Easterly 17 feet of said parcel adjacent to Audubon Road. Subject to a drainage and utility easement over the Southerly and South- Scale: 1"=60' westerly 6 feet adjacent to the Southwesterly line of said parcel. •Denotes Iron Mon. Found _. Proposed Retaining Walls This plan, specification or report was Prop.Gar.Floor Elev. 906.0 prepared by me or under my direct super- Prop.60' Drive @10% Grade 912.0 vision, and that I am a duly Registered Ret.Walls: Land Surveyor fn the State of Minnesota. Lower Wall 910.0 Prop. Signed thS,kR.t?Car day of 6. Higher Wall 976.0 Pro ptember, 2004. yl' 1 13� p� p• 20 X61 f are e State Reg. License No. 6508 W4 6 61 U 17 .:: � Ord��dX11 rY CITY OF CHANHASSEN y n ' SEP 0 3 2004 i 1 QV r% t- I w I I ENGINEERING DEPT. AGI 4V ` 0 r. d mu b a co 11 m I cn v �14 Pool O , 1.0 x O •,� �l Ga Pd OSt, r' " q' 36r 'A J2J P 9e _ P a . A 3�3�r,, O. ADpDeON 1 p4 2 ca ; �\ ROAD a3'F � Roa�WaY Easement This plan, specification or report was Prop . GaProp.60 prepared by me or and y direct super- Ret.Wal vision, and that I am Wduly Registered Lower W Land Surveyor i"n the State of Minnesota. Signed this C2d ay of ptember, 2004.JHigher Frank R. Car arelle State Reg. License No. 650861 aA n moo' I ` -s'p Q, N• i� p {� q o Co1rb N 01 +� Gdhd oSeQ ;c' ,�s.s �zs C S 9e v sNA R r iA' a �ti `t`� � w y_ ca ° e,s Op • • b � O • ,mac ' �v 9 tr�'OA �� tl,Z./ �. p s DO .6 f `BAUD BO 80 Ap � ROaQ "hMILN I ZZ g 0 g32 '� • m �Fa o inz, zpt o uo uNz iLL ¢ zo aioz aza'- a5 i?F v� Wa Q o F ��.-I LL� 2 WZ W 11 J\F S�],N JO LLg}. §� na X23 m w '� F � "d jr90 0 Z � drio 7 W z jmi� N N 0 0 �5. a 0 2 0. 8 � Q Wy Vu �° d Y ss � nom. �OYd�54'111non b 3Ll I I' VIII � as �`om,a iU UWwLLZ zF qp O �C Sit iN bw 0 0 Existing Graded Garage Pad NOW, i $y View of Existing Grading and Garage Pad s v 1 0 0 Extent of Grading Gravel pullout leading to Garage Pad 0 0 View from Audubon Road View of the Retaining Walls from Toe of Bluff f� K See. 20-1122. Access and driveways. The purpose of this• bsection is to provide minimum designcriteria, setback and slope standards for vehicular use. The intent is to reduce interference with drainage and utility easements by providing setback standards; reduce erosion by requiring a hard surface for all driveways; to limit the number of driveway access points to public streets and direct drainage toward the street via establishment of minimum driveway slope standards. Parking and loading spaces shall have proper access from a public right-of-way. The number and width of access drives shall be located to minimize traffic congestion and abnormal traffic hazard. All driveways shall meet the following criteria: a. Driveways shall be setback at least five (5) feet from the side property lines, beginning at twenty (20) feet from the front yard setback unless an encroachment agreement is received from the city. b. Driveway grades shall be a minimum of one-half of one (0.5) percent and a maximum grade of ten (10) percent at any point in the driveway. C. In areas located within the Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA) as identified on the Comprehensive Plan, driveways shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete or other hard surface material, as approved by the city engineer. In areas outside the MUSA, driveways shall be surfaced from the intersection of the road through the right-of-way portion of the driveway with bituminous, concrete or other hard surface material, as approved by the city engineer. d. On corner lots, the minimum corner clearance from the roadway right-of-way line shall be at least thirty (30) feet to the edge of the driveway. e. For A-2. RSF, and R-4 residential uses, the width of the driveway access shall not exceed twenty-four (24) feet at the right-of-way line. No portion of the right-of-way may be paved except that portion used for the driveway. Inside the property line of the site, the maximum driveway width shall not exceed thirty-six (36) feet. The minimum driveway width shall not be less than ten (10) feet. f. For all other uses, the width of the driveway access shall not exceed thirty-six (36) feet in width measured at the roadway right-of-way line. No portion of the right -of --way may be paved except that portion used for the driveway. g. Driveway setbacks may be reduced subject to the following criteria: 1. The driveway will not interfere with any existing easement; and 2. Shall require an easement encroachment agreement from the engineering department; and 3. The location of the driveway must be approved by the city engineer to ensure that it will not cause runoff onto adjacent properties. h. One driveway access is allowed from a single residential lot to the street. i A turnaround is required on a driveway entering onto a state highway, county road or collector roadway as designated in the comprehensive plan, and onto city streets where this is deemed necessary by the city engineer, based on traffic counts, sight distances, street grades, or other relevant factors. If the engineer requires a turnaround, this requirement will be stated on the building permit. j. Separate driveways serving utility facilities are permitted. (Ord- No. 117, § 1, 1-8-90; Ord. No. 330, § 1, 11-13-01) SCANNED Supp. Na 14 125(1 17 0 0 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 October 7, 2004, 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 Variance to Bluff Ordinance on property located at 8850 Audubon Road, Steve Monson — Planning Case No. 04-33 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 thiO44'dayof No&mWe- , 2004. Notary Pu lic 4tw Ka A J. Enge rdt, De ty Clerk AAAAAAA K47MVER WISSEN NotaryMinnesota COUNTY Lq Commission Expires 1/31/2005WVWVW SCANNED Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesda , October 19, 2004 at 7:00 P.M. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for a variance to the bluff ordinance to allow grading Proposal: and construction of a garage/storage area Planning File: 04-33 A licant: Steve Monson Property 8850 Audubon Road 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 at the Meeting: 1, Staff will give an overview of the proposed project, 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., - Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about Questions & this project, please contact Josh Metzer at 952-227-1132 or e - Comments: mail imetzer@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. 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. 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 parry Is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/industrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding Its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any Interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, lease contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Location: Citv Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for a variance to the bluff ordinance to allow grading Proposal: and construction of a garage/storage area Planning File: 04-33 Applicant: Steve Monson Property 8850 Audubon Road 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 public hearing through the following steps: What Happens at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about Questions & this project, please contact Josh Metzer at 952-227-1132 or e - Comments: mail imetzerCci.chanhassen.mn.us. 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. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterati s, 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 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 commerciallmdustrial. • 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 wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its person 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, lease contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. his map is neither a facially recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to W used as one. his map is a compilmon of moords, inf.nhation and data located in various city, county, state and dere offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference urposes only. The City does rot warrant that the Geographic Infomralion System (GIS) Data used r prepare this map are mar tree, ant the City does not represent drat the GIS Data can be used Pr nampbona, traclung or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or Irect on or precision in the depiction of geographic featuresff mors or dscrepames are found lease opntW 952-227-1107. 71he preceding disdarrer is provided pursuant to Minnesota tames §066.03. Subd. 21 (20D0), and the user of this nap acknoWedges Nat the City shall not e liable for any danoges, ant expressly waves all deans, and agrees to defend, indemnity, and old hanniess Ole City earn any and all dams brought by User, its employees or agents, or NiM areas Which arise out of the resets amass or use of dam provided. Subject Properly Tis map is neither a lagaly recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to he used as one. Tis nap is a cmpilefion of records, informabon and dam Imated in venous city, county, state and aderel offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference arposes only. The City does not warram that Ne Geographic Infomation System (GIS) Data usetl D prepare this map ere error Ime, ant Ne City does not represent that Ne GIS Data can be used Dr navigational, tracldng or any other Wrpose requiring exacting naasurerrent of distance or fit tian or precision in the depiction d g Maphic features. d errors or discrepancies are found Nease contact 952-227-1107. The preceding disclaimer is Provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 066 03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this rrap acknowledges that the City shall not is liable for any damages, and expressly waives all darns, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and rad hamiess the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third )mms which arise out of the user's access or use 0 data provided. 0 Public Hearing4hotification Area Pap (500 feet) Monson Variance 8850 Audubon Road City of Chanhassen Planning Case No. 04-33 Subject Property 0 PATRICK L & SHARON M ARBOGAST JACK R BECKER & LARRY B BENNETT 1801 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S DEBRA J TRONES 8950 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1751 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CYNTHIA F BONGARD,TRUSTEE & JAMES A BERNARDS,TRUSTEE 8831 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL J & JOANNE COCHRANE 1751 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHRIS B & LESLIE J ERICKSON 1831 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 THOMAS A & SUSAN A KODET 1741 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 P SCOTT & JENNIFER G PHARIS 1815 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PATRICK WALSH & MEREDITH E SANDSTROM 8731 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 TIMOTHY C BOYCE & TANA I ERICKSON 8941 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DANIEL K & ROBIN L EDMUNDS 1861 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BRUCE H & CLARICE G FEIK 1773 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 STEPJEN J & MARY P MONSON 8850 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JOHN T & JANET K ST ANDREW 1811 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RICH SLAGLE 7411 FAWN HILL ROAD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DENNIS & RUTH CHADDERDON 8900 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RONALD W & CAROL M ENTINGER 8851 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DEBORAH A HUM & THOMAS O MAU 1761 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JEFFREY W & GAIL H MOODY 1800 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SALLY E STUCKEY 1785 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CITY OF CHANIIASSEN 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: 952227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax 952221.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.14W Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax 952.227 1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227 1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www. ci.chanhassen.mn.us 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Josh Metzer, Planning Intern FROM: Lori Haak, Water Resources Coordinator DATE: October 7, 2004 RE: Monson Variance (Planning Case 04-33) 0 Upon review of plans received September 17, 2004, I offer the following comments and recommendations: BLUFFS One area on the property has been identified as bluff (i.e., slope greater than or equal to 30% and a rise in slope of at least 25 feet above the toe). Chanhassen City Code requires preservation of the bluff area. In addition, all structures are required to maintain a 30 -foot setback from the bluff and all grading must occur outside of the bluff impact zone (i.e., the bluff and land located within 20 feet from the top of a bluff). Two retaining walls with a combined height of xx feet were installed in the bluff area without a permit. The existing retaining walls are in violation of City Code. The applicant is requesting a variance to place a garage/storage structure within a bluff. In order for the structure to be constructed, the existing retaining walls would need to remain in place. Staff is concerned about erosion and sediment control on-site, as well as overall bluff stability. GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (maxnnum rime an area can remain unvegetated when arm is not actively being worked) Steeper than 3:1 7 Days 10:1 to 3:1 14 Das Flatter than 10:1 21 Days S(' 4D The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a chaffing downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. w Josh Metzer, Planning born • October 7, 2004 Page 2 of 2 These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made system that discharges to a surface water. Permanent native vegetation should be installed on the slopes to minimize the potential for future slope failure. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Tof Slope Type Ire Time (maximum bine an area can remain unvegetated when area is not actively being worked) Steeper than 3:1 7 Days 10:1 to 3:1 14 Das Flatter than 10:1 21 Days These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made system that discharges to a surface water. 2. Permanent native vegetation shall be installed on the slopes to minimize the potential for future slope failure. Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 CITY OF MEMORANDUM following comments and recommendations: CHAN>IASSEN TO: Josh Metzer, Planning Intern 7700 Market Boulevard PO Boz 147 FROM: Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer M til Chanhassen, MN 55317 a. Location of the retaining wall with top and bottom elevations. Fax: 952.227.1110 b. Driveway location and slope. DATE: October 6, 2004 Administration Fax: 952227.1110 2. The driveway must be hard -surfaced and comply with City code sec. 20 - Phone: 952227.1100 1122 (attached). 2310 Coulter Boulevard Fax: 952227.1110 SUBJ: Variance Review for 8850 Audubon Road Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 Upon review of the variance application submitted by Steve Monson, I offer the following comments and recommendations: Engineering Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1170 1. Submit an existing topographic survey signed by an RIS (registered land surveyor). The survey must show the following: Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 a. Location of the retaining wall with top and bottom elevations. Fax: 952.227.1110 b. Driveway location and slope. c. Garage floor elevation. Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952227.1110 2. The driveway must be hard -surfaced and comply with City code sec. 20 - Recreation Center 1122 (attached). 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 c: Paul Oehme, City Engineer/Public Works Director Planning A Dan Remer, Eng. Tech III Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 gAeng\matt\memos\sraff repottsWarianceskmonson varianceAm Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227 1310 Senior Center Phone: 9522271125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web She www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us The City o1 Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. 4v-1144. ekccess and driveways. The purpose of th&bsection is to provide minimum desi&nteria, setback and slope standards for vehicular use. The intent is to reduce interference with drainage and utility easements by providing setback standards; reduce erosion by requiring a hard surface for all driveways; to limit the number of driveway access points to public streets and direct drainage toward the street via establishment of minimum driveway slope standards. Parking and loading spaces shall have proper access from a public right-of-way. The number and width of access drives shall be located to minimise traffic congestion and abnormal traffic hazard. All driveways shall meet the following criteria: a. Driveways shall be setback at least five (5) feet from the side property lines, beginner at twenty (20) feet from the front yard setback unless an encroachment agreement is received from the city. b. Driveway grades shall be a minimum of one-half of one (0.5) percent and a maximum grade of ten (10) percent at any point in the driveway. C. In areas located within the Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA) as identified on the Comprehensive Plan, driveways shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete or other hard surface material, as approved by the city engineer. In areas outside the MUSA, driveways shall be surfaced from the intersection of the road through the right-of-way portion of the driveway with bituminous, concrete or other hard surface material, as approved by the city engineer. d. On corner lots, the minimum corner clearance from the roadway right-of-way line shall be at least thirty (30) feet to the edge of the driveway. e. For A-2, RSF, and R-4 residential uses, the width of the driveway access shall not exceed twenty-four (24) feet at the right-of-wa-vline. No portion of the right-of-way may be paved except that portion used for the driveway. Inside the property line of the site, the maximum driveway width shall not exceed thirty-six (36) feet. The minimum driveway width shall not be less than ten (10) feet. f. For all other uses, the width of the driveway access shall not exceed thirty-six ( 36) feet in width measured at the roadway right-of-way line. No portion of the right-of-way may be paved except that portion used for the driveway. g. Driveway setbacks may be reduced subject to the following criteria: 1. The driveway will not interfere with any existing easement; and 2. Shall require an easement encroachment agreement from the engineering department; and 3. The location of the driveway must be approved by the city engineer to ensure that it will not cause runoff onto adjacent properties. h. One driveway access is allowed from a single residential lot to the street. L A turnaround is required on a driveway entering onto a state highway, county road or collector roadway as designated in the comprehensive plan, and onto city streets where this is deemed necessary by the city engineer, based on traffic counts, sight distances, street grades, or other relevant factors. If the engineer requires a turnaround, this requirement will be stated on the building permit. j. Separate driveways serving utility facilities are permitted. (Ord. No. 117, § 1, 1-8-90; Ord. No. 330, § 1, 11-13-01) Supp. Na 14 1250.17 err► Date: September 20, 2004 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department 0 By: Josh Metzer, Planning Intern Subject: Request for variance to bluff ordinance to allow grading and construction of a garage/storage area located at 8850 Audubon Road. Applicant: Steve Monson �''k ';7 Planning Case: 04-33 The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on September 17, 2004. The 60 -day review period ends November 16, 2004. 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 conceming 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 concemed 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 October 19, 2004 at 7:00 p.m in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your continents by no later than October 6, 2004. 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 Attomey c. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official f. Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Watershed District Engineer 3. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 4. MN Dept. of Transportation 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 6. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco 7. MN Dept. of Natural Resources 8. Telephone Company (Qwest or United) 9. Electric Company (Xcel Energy or MN Valley) 10. Medicom 11. U. S. Fish and Wildlife 12. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services 13. Other - 14. Date: September 20, 2004 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies 1J From: Planning Department By: Josh Metzer, Planning Intern Subject: Request for variance to bluff ordinance to allow grading and construction of a garagetstorage area located at 8850 Audubon Road. Applicant: Steve Monson Planning Case: 04-33 The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on September 17, 2004. The 60 -day review period ends November 16, 2004. 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 October 19, 2004 at 7:00 p.m in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than October 6, 2004. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. 1. City Departments a. City Engineer b. City Attorney c. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official f Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Watershed District Engineer 3. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 4. MN Dept. of Transportation 5. U.S. Arany Corps of Engineers 6. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco 7. MN Dept. of Natural Resources 8. Telephone Company (Qwest or United) 9. Electric Company (Xcel Energy or MN Valley) 10. Medicom 11. U. S. Fish and Wildlife 12. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services 13. Other - 14. SCANNED O Location Map 0 Monson Variance 8850 Audubon Road City of Chanhassen Planning Case No. 04-33 Subject Property Blvd RECEIVED To: Chanhassen Planning Commission/Staff SEP 17 2004 From: Steve & Mary Pat Monson CITY OF CHANHASSEN Address: 8850 Audubon Road Re: Variance to build garage/storage on bluff We are requesting a variance to build on what is considered by Ordinance a bluff area, listed below are the issues concerning the property and why we feel this is the best possible place to locate the structure. Background Information: In 1997 we wanted to divided the 5 acres we owned into two- 2.5 acre lots as permitted by the city, the original plan was to divide the 5 acres north and south with a common driveway coming in off of Audubon at the south end of the property, which would have allowed flat area's for both lots. The city asked us to change the plotting of the 5 acres to run east and west, which is what we did. Now that leaves us with 2.5 acres almost entirely on what is considered a bluff. Our property is zoned RR Rural Residential. We own 2.5 acres this acreage is surrounded on 3 sides by other property owners and Audubon Road, 90% of the property is on a hill. Our neighbors to the south and west also have 2.5 acre lots, the house to the north we believe is an acre lot. We believe there is only two other area's on our property that may not be considered bluff area's however there isn't access to those area's without crossing through someone else's property to get to it. We are asking for a variance to place a garage with storage just south of our existing driveway. We do not believe the properties in our same zone have the same issues we have. The purpose of the variance is to be able to use with reasonable expectation some of the 2.5 acreage that we own, i.e. out buildings, garages and other structure are within the limitations of the zoning in our area. Our hardship is created by the unique percentage of the property that is located on the bluff. We want to build this structure to store pool equipment and out door furniture that is currently being stored behind our house under tarps in the winter, which is directly below the hill from our neighbors to the north. We believe they would rather not view the tarps, the new structures would not be in view of their home at all. The neighbors to the south are far below the structure. The structure would not block or obstruct views from any of the neighbors. The structure does not impair any air flow, light source to other property owners. It does not add congestion to the street and it is not a fire danger or public safety issue. In closing, we do not believe the structure has any impact on our neighbors except to enclose what we already have stored in the back yard. It does not impact the hill, we did not take down any trees or create an erosion area. Due to the large tree next to the driveway on Audubon we do not believe anyone will see the garage from Audubon. We believe with our 2.5 acres it is with reasonable expectation to be able to build a structure that we can access. rcw W 5 � pWo Q F H op 3 Qa _N ✓1 z o Q o ggb O -- VJZ uQ Z UO LLn2 O d O - t __„�^ o o w ani �Pi� L.% ick oLSz33x'w°o ii o Z Val ;z 3 a g�< a Q K g 2 UYE' o�ga�tm��2°w�< � V n g Cl < 029 W'u z a y �s call Q rymo 0 Z lL 02 3z rcw W 5 � pWo Q F H op 3 Qa _N ✓1 z o Q o ggb O v .L CL • i HLLwmo a5 momre ailooQ�'a FUpUQFz E¢ !P¢y¢ I% G Sec. 20-1122. Access and driveways. The purpose of thoubsection is to provide minimum desiperiteria, setback and slope standards for vehicular use. The intent is to reduce interference with drainage and utility easements by providing setback standards; reduce erosion by requiring a hard surface for all driveways; to limit the number of driveway access points to public streets and direct drainage toward the street via establishment of minimum driveway slope standards. Parking and loading spaces shall have proper access from a public right-of-way. The number and width of access drives shall be located to minimize traffic congestion and abnormal traffic hazard. All driveways shall meet the following criteria: a. Driveways shall be setback at least five (5) feet from the side property lines, beginning at twenty (20) feet from the front yard setback unless an encroachment agreement is received from the city. b. Driveway grades shall be a minimum of one-half of one (0.5) percent and a maximum grade of ten (10) percent at any point in the driveway. C. In areas located within the ?Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA) as identified on the Comprehensive Plan, driveways shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete or other hard surface material, as approved by the city engineer. In areas outside the MUSA, driveways shall be surfaced from the intersection of the road through the right-of-way portion of the driveway with bituminous, concrete or other hard surface material, as approved by the city engineer. d. On corner lots, the minimum corner clearance from the roadway right-of-way line shall be at least thirty (30) feet to the edge of the driveway. e. For A-2. RSF, and R-4 residential uses, the width of the driveway access shall not exceed twenty-four (24) feet at the right-of-way line. No portion of the right-of-way may be paved except that portion used for the driveway. Inside the property line of the site, the maximum driveway width shall not exceed thirty-six (36) feet. The minimum driveway width shall not be less than ten (10) feet. f. For all other uses, the width of the driveway access shall not exceed thirty-six f36) feet in width measured at the roadway right-of-way line. No portion of the right-of-way may be paved except that portion used for the driveway. g. Driveway setbacks may be reduced subject to the following criteria: 1. The driveway will not interfere with any existing easement; and 2. Shall require an easement encroachment agreement from the engineering department; and 3. The location of the driveway must be approved by the city engineer to ensure that it will not cause runoff onto adjacent properties. h. One driveway access is allowed from a single residential lot to the street. i. A turnaround is required on a driveway entering onto a state highway, county road or collector roadway as designated in the comprehensive plan, and onto city streets where this is deemed necessary by the city engineer, based on traffic counts, sight distances, street grades, or other relevant factors. If the engineer requires a turnaround, this requirement will be stated on the building permit. j. Separate driveways serving utility facilities are permitted. (Ord. No. 117, § 1, 1-8-90; Ord. No. 330, § 1, 11-13-01) Supp. Na 14 1250.17 SCANNED 0 CITY OF CIIAANflAS3EN 690 City CemerDrive, PO Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Phan 6129371900 General Fax 611.937.5739 En#neenngFar 612.937 9152 Publir Safety Fax 612 934.2524 Web wum<o.chanhauen.mn.us 0 November _12, 1998 Steve and Mary Pat MgDson 8850 -Audubon Road ri k Chanhassen, MN 55317 I�u�iTl3=&� U This letter is to formally notify you that on October 26, 1998, the City Council approved the metes and bounds subdivision (#97-11) of Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge into two lots subject to the following conditions: A detailed grading, drainage, and erosion control plan will be required at the time of building permit application for staff review and approval. The plan shall include driveway grades/location, tree preservation plan, lowest floor elevations, top of block and garage floor elevations, culvert type/size and location, existing and proposed grade elevations around the structure pursuant to city codes. 2. The applicant shall dedicate to the city by permanent easement a drainage and utility easement over the creek up to the 100 -year flood elevation (881.6) and right-of-way along the easterly 17 feet of Parcels I and II. 3. If the applicant connects to city water, hook-up and connection fees for water shall be collected at time of building permit issuance. The applicant also has the option to install a well. 4. The driveway grade shall not exceed 10% and shall be paved for the first 40 to 50 feet off Audubon Road. 5. The developer shall pay the city $450 for administrative, GIS, and recording fees before the city signs the recording documents. 6. The developer shall pay full park and trail fees for parcel II pursuant to city ordinance. Protect each ISTS site in accordance with Chanhassen Inspections Division Policy #10-199 prior to any activity (grading, construction, recreation, etc.) near the sites. -', WANK o The City of Chanhassen. Agrowing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a ebarming doumtown, thriving businesses, and beautifnd parks. Agreat place to live, work, and play MW Steve and Mary Pat Monson November 12, 1998 Page 2 8. The applicant shall pay water quality fees of $285.00 and water quantity fees of $707.00 prior to recording of the subdivision documents. 9. Requirements for building setbacks on an ag/urbanwetland area 10 foot buffer zone in addition to a 40 foot building setback. j Please submit the documents and fees as required by the conditions of approval. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Robert Generous Senior Planner RG:v c: Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer Steve Kirchman, Building Official \\cfsl WoMplan\bg\monson.e.doc 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner DATE: October 12, 1998 SUBJ: Metes and Bounds Subdivision (97-11), 8850 Audubon Road, Steve and Mary Pat Monson PROPOSAL The applicant is requesting a metes and bounds subdivision creating two lots on Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge Addition, which is a 5 acre parcel zoned Rural Residential, RR, district. The district regulations permit a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres, require a minimum street frontage of 200 feet and a minimum depth of 200 feet. The proposed lots meet the minimum zoning ordinance requirements. The site is guided in the comprehensive plan for Large Lot Residential which permits 2.5 acre minimum lots inside MUSA. This item was previously submitted to the city in January, 1998. At that time, the applicant withdrew their application to permit the city to finalize plans for the alignment of the Bluff Creek corridor trail. The trail corridor has been realigned through the property to the south which will act as a trail head for the public. The city council may approve a metes and bounds subdivision of a platted lot into two lots inside the urban services area if both resulting lots meet the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance and abut an existing public street. Staff had reviewed the conditions of approval and cited the specific sections of the ordinance that authorize or require such conditions. The following is a review of the conditions: A detailed grading, drainage, and erosion control plan will be required at the time of building permit application for staff review and approval. The plan shall include driveway grades/location, tree preservation plan, lowest floor elevations, top of block and garage floor elevations, culvert typesize and location, existing and proposed grade elevations around the structure pursuant to city codes. 0 0 Don Ashworth October 12, 1998 Page 2 *Sections 7-19, Plans and specifications, Section 18-62, Erosion and sediment control, and Section 20-94, Grading and erosion control. These requirements are standard for all building permits. 2. The applicant shall dedicate to the City by permanent easement a drainage and utility easement over the creek up to the 100 -year flood elevation (881.6) and right-of-way along the easterly 17 feet of Parcels I and H. *Section 18-76, Easements, Section 18-77, Dedication of land or contribution of cash for public purposes, and Section 18-78, Required improvements. Section 18-57, Streets, Section 18-76, Easements, and Section 18-77, Dedication of land or contribution of cash for public purposes. Building setbacks shall be 50 feet from the required roadway easement. Dedication of such easements are required of all subdivisions. 3. If the applicant connects to city water, hook-up and connection fees for water shall be collected at time of building permit issuance. The applicant also has the option to install a well. *Sections 19-19, Use required; wells prohibited, and 19-20, Connection charges. Staff is proposing that we leave it up to the property owner to determine if it is feasible and practical to connect to city water. If the developer connects to city water, then hook-up and connection fees for water shall be collected at time of building permit issuance. Staff has taken a neutral position on the connection issue. 4. The driveway grade shall not exceed 10% and shall be paved for the first 40 to 50 feet off Audubon Road. * Sections 7-19, Plans and specifications, Section 18-62, Erosion and sediment control, and Section 18-60, Lots. These requirements are in place to protect, preserve, and enhance the water quality in the community. The 10 percent grade is to provide for the safety of individuals as they enter and leave their property. 5. The developer shall pay the city $450 for administrative, GIS, and recording fees before the city signs the recording documents. *Section 18-39, Preliminary Plat. Requires the property owner to pay all applicable fees for the recording of the plat. 6. The developer shall pay full park and trail fees for parcel II pursuant to City Ordinance. *Section 18-77, Dedication of land or contribution of cash for public purposes. • Don Ashworth October 12, 1998 Page 3 7. Protect each ISTS site in accordance with Chanhassen Inspections Division Policy #10-199 prior to any activity (grading, construction, recreation, etc.) near the sites. 8. The applicant shall pay water quality fees of $285.00 and water quantity fees of $707.00 prior to recording of the subdivision documents. *Section 18-63, Surface Water Management. 9. Requirements for building setbacks on an ag/urban wetland are a 10 foot buffer zone in addition to a 40 foot building setback." *Section 20-406, Wetland buffer strips and setbacks. GRADING Parcel "Il" created under the proposed lot split is generally an open field with land contours ranging from elevation 896 at the northwest comer to elevation 876 at the creek bottom which runs east/west long the southerly boundary of the proposed lot. The plan shows an existing driveway entrance will be used to access the site. The driveway grade shall be 10% slope or less per ordinance. In addition, because of the steepness, the first 40 to 50 feet of the driveway shall be paved with a bituminous surface in an effort to minimize erosion into the creek. A detailed grading drainage and erosion control plan will be required at time of building permit application for staff review and approval. DRAINAGE The parcel generally sheet drains to the creek at the south end of the proposed lot, although a major drainageway does bisect the lot and will be affected by the proposed driveway location. A drainage culvert will need to be installed under the driveway at this point to maintain drainage. The size of the culvert shall be large enough to accommodate the neighborhood runoff. According to the city's SWMP, a 27" diameter culvert will be needed to accommodate 33.2 CFS of runoff. Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated to the city over the creek up to the 100 -year flood elevation (881.6). The lowest floor elevation of the dwelling must be a minimum of two feet above the 100 -year flood level (HWL) of the creek. UTILITIES The existing house on Parcel I is on a well and septic system. Parcel "117' may be served with city water via the 12 -inch watermain running along the west side of Audubon Road or install a well. city ordinance requires dwellings within 150 feet of the waterline to connect. The applicant Don Ashworth October 12, 1998 Page 4 and/or builder would be responsible for water hook-up and connection fees at time of building permit issuance if they wish to connect to city water. The city will install a water service up to the property line upon written request. The city requests a 30 day notice in advance to perform the work. City sanitary sewer is not available to this parcel. Based on the plans, it appears there are two approved drain field sites. MISCELLANEOUS The parcel is encumbered with a 20 -foot wide trail easement along the southerly and easterly sides of the parcel. Audubon Road is listed as a collector street in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The recommended right-of-way width is 100 feet. Currently, Audubon Road right-of-way is 66 feet. Audubon Road north of this development is 100 feet wide. Staff recommends that the applicant dedicate by permanent easement the easterly 17 feet of Parcels I and II to the city as right-of-way. ANALYSIS The subject lot, Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge, was provided with two ISTS (individual sewage treatment system) sites when it was platted. Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge currently comprises five acres. ISTS sites. Two ISTS sites per lot are currently required by the City Code. We have received soil borings and drawings showing the location of the three proposed ISTS sites. A site inspection confirms these three new sites to be acceptable. The sites must remain undisturbed until such time the ISTS are constructed on them. In order to prevent accidental destruction of the sites, sites on each parcel must be protected before any grading or construction is done on the respective parcel. ISTS site protection must meet the requirements of Chanhassen Inspections Division Policy #10- 1991 (enclosed). Surveys The survey the Inspection Division currently has for Parcels I and H ( revised 12/12/97) show the ISTS sites on Parcel H as they were staked in the field by the designer and approved by the city. A survey should be submitted showing the sites as part of the building permit process. WETLANDS There is a portion of one large wetland identified on this site. This wetland begins south of the proposed lot split and extends west behind the Lake Susan Hills development. This wetland has been identified by the city's wetland inventory as an Ag/Urban wetland. Requirements for 0 0 Don Ashworth October 12, 1998 Page 5 building setbacks on a agturban wetland are a 10 foot buffer zone in addition to a 40 foot building setback. The Bluff Creek also runs directly through this wetland and is located along the south side of the proposed new lot. In this area the creek has been trenched and lost all natural meanders as the result of farming activities. As part of a wetland restoration project, the city is proposing to raise the standing water level of this wetland to increase flood storage, increase water treatment capacity and to drowned out invasive plant species. The city also plans to re -meander the Bluff Creek in this area as part of this same project. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) Water Quality Fee SWMP fees are based on a total developable land area of 2.5 acres. In a typical single family residential development of this size, the water quality fee would be $2,000 or $800 per acre. This figure is based on 15,000 s.f. lot sizes. However, in large lot residential developments, the minimum lot size is 2.5 acres. Therefore, the applicant is required to pay $285.00 in water quality fees, or the per unit charge for single family residential developments. Water Quantity Fee The total net area of the property is 2.5 acres of SRF large lot as discussed above. Using the formula discussed above, the single unit water quantity connection charge is $707.00. These SWMP fees will be due payable to the city at time of final plat recording. PARK AND RECREATION Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge Addition is currently encumbered by a 20' walkway easement along its southern and eastern borders. On June 14, 1997, Chanhassen voters approved a bond referendum that included monies to construct the trail along the southern edge of this property. This trail in its entirety will be constructed from Audubon Road north to the Chanhassen Business Center. Upon initiating design of the trail, it became apparent that the existing easement would not accommodate the needs of this project. Since that time, the city has realigned the trail to go through the property to the south. The city will require cash in lieu of park land dedication. The applicant shall be required to pay full park and trail fees for parcel 2 pursuant to city ordinance. Don Ashworth October 12, 1998 Page 6 FINDINGS The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; Finding: The subdivision meets all the requirements of the RR, Rural Residential District. 2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; Finding: The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable plans. 3. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; Finding: The proposed site is suitable for development subject to the conditions specified in this report. 4. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by private well and septic as permitted by city ordinance. 5. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; Finding: The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage subject to conditions of approval. 6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record. Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage. b. Lack of adequate roads. 0 Don Ashworth October 12, 1998 Page 7 0 C. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. d. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. Finding: The proposed subdivision is provided with adequate infrastructure. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves the metes and bounds subdivision (#97-11) of Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge into two lots subject to the following conditions: A detailed grading, drainage, and erosion control plan will be required at the time of building permit application for staff review and approval. The plan shall include driveway grades/location, tree preservation plan, lowest floor elevations, top of block and garage floor elevations, culvert typesize and location, existing and proposed grade elevations around the structure pursuant to city codes. 2. The applicant shall dedicate to the city by permanent easement a drainage and utility easement over the creek up to the 100 -year flood elevation (881.6) and right-of-way along the easterly 17 feet of Parcels I and H. 3. If the applicant connects to city water, hook-up and connection fees for water shall be collected at time of building permit issuance. The applicant also has the option to install a well. 4. The driveway grade shall not exceed 10% and shall be paved for the first 40 to 50 feet off Audubon Road. 5. The developer shall pay the city $450 for administrative, GIS, and recording fees before the city signs the recording documents. 6. The developer shall pay full park and trail fees for parcel II pursuant to city ordinance. 7. Protect each ISTS site in accordance with Chanhassen Inspections Division Policy #10-199 prior to any activity (grading, construction, recreation, etc.) near the sites. 8. The applicant shall pay water quality fees of $285.00 and water quantity fees of $707.00 prior to recording of the subdivision documents. 0 0 Don Ashworth October 12, 1998 Page 8 9. Requirements for building setbacks on an ag/urban wetland area 10 foot buffer zone in addition to a 40 foot building setback." ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Application. 2. Memo from David Hempel to Sharmin A]-Jaff dated 9/28/98 3. Notice of Public Hearing and Mailing List. 4. Certificate of Survey. gAplan\bg\metes and bounds subdivision - monson2.doc September 8, 1987 0 7J CITY OF CHANHASHN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 Mr. Rod Grams 6471 Fox Path Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Grams: This is to confirm that grading on the site west of and adjacent to Audubon Road, to be known as Lot 5 of your subdivision, is to be for the foundation of the house only. The building permit for the site will not be issued until Council action is completed on your subdivision request and the septic system ordinance amend- ment. Also, please install staked haybales around excavation areas to prevent erosion. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. S �L Barbara Dacy City Planner 1 -- cc: Ron Julkowski SCANNED 0 Location Map Monson Variance 8850 Audubon Road City of Chanhassen Planning Case No. 04-33 Subject Property yn„r;4FO z 0 0 CD N Q� C CD N 0 Ll 33 Planning Commission emary — October 19, 2004 • . b. The building must comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policies 34-1993, 36-1994, 29-1991, 07-1991, 06-1991, and 04- 1991. Copies enclosed. 0 13. Building Official conditions: a. The building is required to be protected by automatic fire extinguishing systems. b. The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. c. Submit a site plan indicating the location of all property lines. d. An eight foot access aisle is required for the accessible parking space. e. Detailed occupancy related requirements cannot be reviewed until complete plans are submitted. f. The owner and/or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. 14. All roof top equipment shall be screened. 15. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary financial securities. 16. Wall signs shall be permitted on the east elevation of the building only and must comply with Neighborhood Business District requirements. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signs on site. A detailed sign plan incorporating the method of lighting acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a sign permit. 17. The applicant shall provide a survey signed by a registered land surveyor verifying that the hard surface coverage on this site does not exceed 65%. 18. A detailed fighting plan is required and only shielded fixtures are allowed as prescribed by ordinance. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: CASE NO. 04-331 Public Present: Name Address 0 Steve & Mary Pat Monson 8850 Audubon Road Planning Commission Arnary — October 19, 2004 • Dennis & Ruth Chadderdon 8900 Audubon Road Josh Metzer presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Lillehaug asked for clarification on the need to obtain permits for the work performed. Also that it appears a neighbors house, which was built 3 to 4 years ago, was built within the bluff and asked for further clarification on the definition of a bluff. Commissioner Slagle asked for clarification on the extent of the bluff. Commissioner Papke asked if there was precedence for this type of variance request. Commissioner Tjomhom asked for historical information on when the parcel was subdivided, if the bluff was identified at that time, and what options exist for restoration. Commissioner Claybaugh asked for clarification on the height and setback of the retaining walls and regulations regarding grading. Commissioner Papke asked staff to reiterate the damage that would be done if the applicant were asked to re-establish the bluff, and impacts to Bluff Creek. Chairman Sacchet asked staff to address the statement made by the applicant that the city asked them to change the plotting of the 5 acres to run east and west, which puts most of their 2 1/z acres entirely on the bluff. He also asked for clarification in the two Finding of Fact reports, item E seems to contradict each other. The applicant Steve Monson, 8850 Audubon Road addressed the issues regarding the previous subdivision and what was requested by the city and the amount of dirt that has been moved on the site. Mary Pat Monson stated when they built a swimming pool on the site a few years ago, there was never mention of a bluff at that time and comparisons of their property to a neighbor's down the road which appears to have steeper slopes. Chairman Sacchet opened the public hearing. Dennis Chadderdon, 8900 Audubon Road, the neighbor directly south of the Monson's stated there's been no erosion problems as a result of this construction work and that he supports the variance request. Chairman Sacchet closed the public hearing. In talking about runoff, the applicant stated they would build a trench filled with rock on the south side of the garage to catch runoff. He also showed pictures of the neighboring property in relation to the slope. After commissioner discussion, the following motion was made. Lillehaug moved, Claybaugh seconded that the Planning Commission approves Variance #04-33 for the construction of a garagetstorage building in a bluff as shown on the plans stamped "Received June 22, 2004", with the following conditions: 1. A building permit must be applied for within one year of approval of the variance or it shall become void. 2. The proposed addition must be built per plans stamped "Received June 22, 2004". 3. The applicant must submit plans for the ramp before proceeding with construction. 4. An after the fact building permit for grading must be applied for. !1 Planning Commission Amary —October 19, 2004 0 5. The graded slope must a entirely reinforced with a retaining wall which will require a building permit; or must be restored to a slope less than 3:1. 6. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (maximum Hme an area can remain unvegetated when area is not actively he' worked) Steeper than 3:1 7 Days 10:1 to 3:1 14 Days Flatter than 10:1 21 Days These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man-made system that discharges to any surface water. 7. Permanent native vegetation shall be installed on the slopes to minimize the potential for future slope failure. 8. Submit an existing topographic survey signed by an RLS (registered land surveyor). The survey must show the following: a. Location of the retaining wall with top and bottom elevations. b. Driveway location and slope. c. Garage floor elevation. 9. The driveway must be hard surfaced and comply with City Code Sec. 20-1122 (attached). 10. No home occupation or business use will be pennitted in the existing attached garage or proposed detached garage/storage building, as stated in City Code 20- 977: "...No garage or accessory buildings except accessory agriculture buildings existing on February 19, 1987 shall be used for any home occupation." 11. The applicant shall submit for staff approval and construct a French drainage system, along with gutters on the garagetstorage building. All voted in favor, except Papke who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. 0 LI -3 3 Planning Commission Ating — October 19, 2004 • 16. Wall signs shall be permitted on the east elevation of the building only and must comply with Neighborhood Business District requirements. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signs on site. A detailed sign plan incorporating the method of lighting acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a sign permit. 17. The applicant shall provide a survey signed by a registered land surveyor verifying that the hard surface coverage on this site does not exceed 65%. 18. A detailed lighting plan is required and only shielded fixtures are allowed as prescribed by ordinance. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: Public Present: Name Address Steve & Mary Pat Monson Dennis & Ruth Chadderdon 8850 Audubon Road 8900 Audubon Road Josh Metzer presented the staff report on this item. Sacchet: Thank you. Questions from staff. Steve, you want to jump in? Lillehaug: I have a couple questions. On the second page, and I think you also reiterated it. There's two walls approximately 3 feet in height. They graded the driveway out there. You say all of these improvements were made without a permit. You don't need a permit for any of that work. Metzer: Right, and that's why in the presentation I said or zoning compliance. I failed to mention that in the report. Lillehaug: And is that something, one of the new zoning permits that we require now, is that it? I mean brand new within the last couple months? Is that right? Al -Jaffa It's part of the amended ordinances. However, if you are grading within a bluff, that's not a permitted action. And as far as the retaining wall, I don't know if Matt you would like to address that. 0 Planning Commission Sting — October 19, 2004 • Saam: Sure, retaining walls under 4 feet you don't need a permit, but if you are grading in the right-of-way for a driveway connection, Audubon Road is city owned and controlled, then you would need a right-of-way permit. Lillehaug: So you're saying there's grading that took place within county right-of-way? Saam: Audubon there is city. City owned. Lillehaug: Okay, city. Saam: I'm saying if you are grading in a driveway and you grade into the right-of-way, then you would need it. If he exactly did that, I'm not sure where the right-of-way line is in reference to where he graded. Where his gravel starts. I guess we didn't check that, but I just wanted to clarify if he had gone into the right-of-way, then a permit would have been required. Lillehaug: Alright. One other question. And it would be pertaining to a residence, a couple residences to the west there, I mean there's a new house that was built there ... 3 to 4 years ago. It looks like that whole house is built on a bluff. Can you comment on that? Al -Jaffa Sure. Mr. Monson stopped by city hall earlier today and asked the exact same question, and Josh, Matt and I looked at the site and each calculated separately and we came up with a 20 percent, between 20 and 21 percent slope. The ordinance requires 25? Al -Jaffa 30, I'm sorry. 30 percent. Lillehaug: It's the same bluff though. AI -Jaffa It's the same bluff. However. Sacchet: It doesn't qualify based on the steepness. Al -Jaffa Yeah, the steepness is substantially less. Lillehaug: So over there you're saying they could build anywhere on that, anywhere on that slope. Al -Jaffa That's correct. Lillehaug: Where that new house is a couple down. But on this property it's considered a bluff, and what's the actual grade of the bluff then? Is it right at 25 percent or? Steeper? 7 Planning Commission Sting — October 19, 2004 • Saam: Are you asking what the grade of the bluff on the applicant's property is or what the definition of the bluff is? Lillehaug: Both. Saam: Okay, the definition is a 25 foot elevation drop with a 30 percent, basically 3 to 1 slope or grade. And I believe the applicant is right at, Sharmeen add, he's right in that 33 percent area. 30 percent. Al -Jaffa And the other thing that we did was, we actually asked the applicant to hire a registered land surveyor to look at the slope and tell us whether this is a bluff or not, and the conclusion was that it was a bluff. Lillehaug: Okay. Al-Jaff: And the grading that took place was within the bluff. Lillehaug: That's all the questions I have. Slagle: If I can ask, so the applicant after your request did hire a surveyor. AI -Jaffa That is correct. Slagle: Okay. And they came back with that. Let me ask this question Sharmeen. Using the average citizen who would look at something like this, in your opinion would it be quite obvious that this slope would require someone to do something? And I don't want to put you on the spot but I'm just saying, place yourself as an average citizen, do you see that, I mean right away someone say wait a minute. Something has to be looked at here. Just trying to get a gauge. Because I mean, again if we go to the neighbor to the west who built this big house, I'm just wondering if I was a citizen and I looked over, I don't know if I would know 20 some percent to 30 some percent. Al-Jaff: I honestly don't know but, and I don't know whether this issue came up or not. The applicant did go through a subdivision a few years back. Whether the issue of the bluff was raised at that point or not. Slagle: Okay. We don't know if it was? At the time. Al -Jaffa I don't know. Slagle: Okay. Matt, you were going to say something. Saam: Yeah, Commissioner Slagle. I'll just add, you know in our department quite often we get people coming in asking, you know say in this case. You're looking to do a garage. Well what are the requirements. I guess yes, I do see it probably at least once a week during a summer season, somebody will come in or if they want to move a Planning Commission Ating — October 19, 2004 • significant amount of dirt or do a retaining wall. Now if it's just a gravel driveway, maybe not. But when you're talking about a garage on a hill where you're moving dirt with machinery, I would think most, just my opinion, most citizens, we do see them come in and ask hey, are there any requirements here. Do you need a permit for this and what not. Slagle: Okay. One last question Sharmeen, or Josh. I mean what was the demeanor of the applicant when the applicant was informed that it was indeed on a bluff and sort of you have to stop. AI -Jaffa I think they were fairly surprised. I mean when I initially looked at the survey I noticed the steep slopes and contacted the applicant and I said, it just seems like severe slopes and we need someone to provide us with more information. I mean they weren't happy about it. Slagle: And at that point did they provide the information they had already graded it. Okay. So it was them giving us the information they had graded it versus us discovering that it was graded. Al -Jaffa That's correct. I mean they, the only reason we truly found out about it was because they applied for a building permit and we contacted them and said you can't do this and they said but a retaining wall is in and. Sacchet: Kurt. Papke: Quite commonly when we have an application for a variance like this, staff prepares some sort of precedent analysis that you know certain houses in the neighborhood has this happened before, etc, etc. Do we have any data on this kind of a grading in a bluff where we have had variances requested, granted, or in this case where we've had to go in and have a similar situation where we've had somebody who has done the grading before asking for the variance. So what kind of history or precedence do we have, if any? Al -Jaffa There isn't anything within 500 feet. Papke: Okay, and that's the requirement that you have for staff to only examine properties within 500 feet. So there has been no precedent in the area. I realize this is kind of putting you on the spot, but across the city are there any cases of precedent where we've had a similar situation? Al -Jaffa Where someone graded into the bluff? Papke: Yes. C9 Planning Commission Sting — October 19, 2004 • Saam: Well the recent Moon Valley site that we looked at that we're now going to be restored. That one comes to mind. That was years ago. I guess not that I recall since I've been here that I've reviewed personally. Usually we flag those. Lillehaug: The site right north of Moon Valley, the whole development there. There was a lot of grading within the bluff there I think. Partially on Eden Prairie and Chanhassen, that development there. Al -Jaffa Settlers West? Saam: I don't know that there was grading into the bluff. Lillehaug: Into the setback of the bluff. Saam: That may be, but I know on that one they did protect the bluff and it's like we had them do storm sewer to prevent drainage from going over the bluff. Sacchet: I think we reduced the setback on them but not the bluff. Claybaugh: Stabilize the bluff wasn't it? As I understood it. Papke: Yeah. Okay, so we have no cases, no precedent here of any kind? Al-Jaff: None that comes to mind right now. Sacchet: Any other questions? Tjornhom: Mine was I think historical. Just wanting to know when they did divide their lots in 1997, if the city, if that code was being, excuse me. Was that code that requires the preservation of the bluff area in full force? I mean were they told then in 1997 that, and obviously you don't know the answer but. Metzer: I believe the bluff ordinance was adopted in 1992, somewhere in that area. It was at least a few years before this subdivision occurred. Tjornhom: Okay. And what are some of the options then that they have for restoring it? Saam: Well, removal first off of the walls. You know I believe it's a boulder wall. And then it's just stabilizing the slope. I think we listed a maximum of 3 to 1 in there with blanketing, that sort of thing. Getting some type of vegetation established on there to keep the slope intact. It's not as severe a site as the Moon Valley one that I brought to your attention just a minute ago but some of those same type measures that we're going to do there, on a much smaller scale we do here. Tjomhom: So it looked like in the picture they took out a lot of land or, you know when I look at the pictures I see. 10 Planning Commission lating —October 19, 2004 • Sacchet: Got a cut into the bluff rather than building it. Tjornhom: Right. What did they do with that, I mean did they dispose of that flat? Where'd the dirt go, that's it? Alright, where'd the dirt go? Is the dirt still there? Metzer: If you look it kind of looks like what they graded, they used to push out and create the building. Sacchet: To the retaining wall, okay. Metzer: There's two retaining walls. There's one up. They graded here. Made the building pad here and another retaining wall down here. Tjornhom: Okay. Sacchet: Makes sense. Claybaugh: Did they set those walls back 4 feet, is that what they did Matt? Not 3, back 4. Not the 3. Something on that configuration? Saam: Yeah, I don't believe the walls are, at least the rock part is over 4 feet. So but yeah, it's a two tiered one. Claybaugh: Okay. That in part gets back to what we discussed with the City Council with respect to the retaining walls and the setbacks and the one thing that would help circumvent things getting to this point with setting those walls back rather than just enforcing that 4 foot ordinance. Do you know who performed the excavation out there? Or would that be a question for the applicant? Saam: I don't. Metzer: A question for an applicant, I'm not sure. Claybaugh: Do we have any ordinances with respect to pulling a permit with x number of, once you cross the threshold for cubic yards being moved. Saam: Yeah, I think. Metzer: 10 I believe it is. Claybaugh: And I'm assuming that this certainly qualified for more than 10 yards. Metzer: Matt was out there with me. I wasn't sure. 11 Planning Commission Asting — October 19, 2004 • Saam: Yes, yeah just remembering back estimating. Yes, I'm sure it would qualify. We would ask the applicant if he would have any idea but yeah. Claybaugh: How far into the bluff using the toe as the reference point would you say that they're into it? Saam: Oh, the width of the. Metzer: They're more, they're very near the top of the bluff. Saam: Yeah, I guess it was my understanding, and maybe the applicant can add something that the bluff was here. Maybe the top is cut in but then you, I believe you'd have to actually fill to get the flat part for the driveway. Or for the garage, so I'm not sure how far they actually went into the bluff. Metzer: If you look, there's a picture in the report giving you an idea of how far from the, the person who took the picture was standing at the toe of the bluff. I was at the nearest retaining wall. The edge of the building. Slagle: So you were the model? Metzer: Yes. Sacchet: Oh that's you. Didn't recognize you. Metzer: I had to go in there for a sense of scale. Sacchet: I thought it was very good to have a person in there, definitely. Claybaugh: Last thing I would add, probably a little more comment than question with respect to people recognizing whether there's a bluff or not. I know that we've sat in no less than 2 round table meetings with developers that had expressed surprise that the land that they had purchased included as much bluff area as it has. That I know for a fact so that's a developer that makes his living doing that. That has already acquired land and is, finds himself in a position where it's not what he expected so I certainly could see it very comfortably happening to a home applicant so, it's a difficult thing for a homeowner to know. That's all I have. Sacchet: Kurt. Papke: Another follow-up question from Bethany's line of questioning. If we were to ask the applicant to push the dirt back up the hill into the cut, what is your assessment of any additional damage that would be done to the bluff and the vegetation and so on in that area. 12 Planning Commission Sting — October 19, 2004 • Saam: Short term sure. There would be some but I think in the long term, once it's, once the bluff slope is re-established, it's going to be better for the long term versus having the garage there and impervious associated runoff, that sort of thing. Papke: And another follow along question to that. This is fairly close to the Bluff Creek area, yes. And is there any concern from an engineering perspective of any runoff from any dirt in this area from the cut or from the re-establishing of the bluff going down into the Bluff Creek area in terms of silt drainage and so on? Saam: Sure. There would have to be measures put in place. Silt fence. That sort of thing prior to any, whether the variance is granted or not, whether restoration is made or not, silt fence is going to have to be put up prior to any work occurring to prevent what you just said from happening. Papke: Is there any silt fence there now? Saam: Not that I saw. We were out there last Thursday. I think Josh, it wasn't there then. Metzer: Not that information Sacchet: Few more questions. So our main concern is the erosion and with vegetation and all that, we can mitigate it reasonably? Saam: Yes, I do. Metzer: Others in the planning department felt it could be done also. Sacchet: And obviously that would apply to both? Whether the shed goes in or not. If it's restored or not, either way the re -vegetation would be the remedy, right? Metzer: Correct. Sacchet: Okay. In the letter from the applicant, it's end of the first paragraph. The applicant states the city asked us to change the plotting of the 5 acres to run east and west, which is what we did. Now that leaves us with 2'h acres almost entirely on what is considered a bluff. That was a city request to do it that way? Were we aware, I don't know whether any of us were here then. Metzer: In the discussion that I've heard, just talking about, it was stated that when the home, the Monson's home was already constructed at the time that this subdivision took place. They were proposing a private access to both properties along the south, if it was to be divided north and south. But that would require the driveway to be built all the way up the bluff to the Monson home from the south, which. Al -Jaffa Do you want to show on the overhead? 13 Planning Commission ting — October 19, 2004 • Sacchet: Yeah, if you could show us on the layout, that would help. Metzer: Okay, it was originally, this would be the Monson property before subdivision. Sacchet: Those two together, okay. Metzer: Yeah. Originally they wanted, sort of like this with a private access running along the south. There is a wetland here. Sacchet: That's the low side. Metzer: Right. Sacchet: That's the bottom of. Metzer: Trees and buffer here where the construction building, so this would have required a driveway from this south portion all the way up to the Monson home over here. Coming through the bluff which you can see, if that comes out at all. ...come up somewhat in through here to this extreme contour. Claybaugh: Was that specifically identified at the time that the bluff was the reason, or one of the primary reasons for reconfiguring that? Metzer: I'm not sure. Yeah, I was talking to Bob about this and he had mentioned it would have been coming through the bluff, from my understanding. Claybaugh: Right, I understand that they're looking at that, and that's on the table and they all realize that now. Was that part of the discussion at that time? Is there any records available to that effect? Metzer; Not that I could find. Al -Jaffa And the staff reports that we found indicate, or there are some discussions dealing with Bluff Creek, but. Claybaugh: But what I was specifically after, did they ever identify that the bluff existed on this site during any of that previous correspondence? That you can identify. Al -Jaffa It mentioned that the elevations are from 896 to 876 on one of the parcels but not the one that had the house. So it's addressing mainly the southern piece, which would have the proposed future development. But not specifically the Monson piece. The existing Monson piece that we're dealing with today. Claybaugh: Okay. 14 Planning Commission ting — October 19, 2004 • Al -Jaffa I would also like to remind you that with this scenario the east/west property line versus the north/south, you have two parcels that actually abut a public street that meet the minimum ordinance requirements, so just keep that in mind also. Sacchet: Okay. I have another question here. This is kind of a technicality in the staff report on page 4, where Finding E states that we are concerned about the dangers of erosion and danger to the natural character of the land. And then when we look at the findings after the staff report, the first attachment, Finding E says, the granting of a variance will not be detrimental to public. The two seem to contradict each other. So I assume the one in the staff report is what we, what your position is, is that accurate? Al -Jaffa That's correct. Sacchet: Okay. So we may need to line that up with what we're saying in the Findings of Fact. Metzer: Well with the public, I mean residents. Sacchet: Alright. I think that's all my questions. With that I'd like to invite the applicant to come forward. If you want to tell us your version of what's happening here, we'd really appreciate it. Steve Monson: Okay, my name is Steve Monson. I live at 8850 Audubon Road. Sacchet: Welcome. Steve Monson: First with this old, when we were going to split the lot we were going to kind of just, you know it was going to go up like this and over, and then we were going to just use this driveway that was here. You know the house that got built there, and we were just going to come off the same driveway because we didn't want to drive out onto another spot out here on Audubon. So we were just going to come and then have another driveway coming onto our lot. But the city wanted us to go out like this instead of like that. Sacchet: Was there any mention about the bluff in that context? Steve Monson: No. They never, I never heard of a bluff. That's why I. Sacchet: Right, it's kind of new. Not so pleasant surprise. Steve Monson: And the thing was, that house that's built two doors down, you know that's even more on a slope than our house is. That's the way I look at it. So I never thought of it. One thing is, you know with the, you guys were talking about the dirt and what do we do with all of the dirt. Did we push it down the hill? Actually this retaining, that boulder retaining wall that's at the top, it's sloped down from my driveway, down 15 Planning Commission lating —October 19, 2004 • about 3 feet. So all we did was just make a little level spot to stack those boulders up. So then we, when we took this dirt from here and put it behind, that's what we used. Sacchet: Moved it up actually. Steve Monson: Go behind it so I could make my driveway larger. That's what started this whole thing was because I wanted to make my driveway bigger so I could turn around and back up. So we cut about a 5 foot cut in here, and by the time we got out to the 16 or 18 feet off another edge here, there was... So there wasn't very much dirt that came out of there. And then about the vegetation, there's vegetation on the, there are places never been you know disrupted or, you know there will never be any erosion because the vegetation's just really vegetated. But anyway, when we had bought that house we were told that we could build anything we wanted on the whole 5 acres or 2'h acres at that time. We didn't see anything about a bluff area, so that didn't come to mind either so. Sacchet: Anything else you'd like to add? Mary Pat Monson: He's trying to read my notes. Sacchet: Maybe you should come up and help him present. Mary Pat Monson: I'm Mary Pat Monson and I also live at 8850. One other thing that kind of came up. We put a pool in a few years ago off to the side of the house, and at that time nothing was ever said about, that we were in the bluff area. We put in some retaining walls on both edges of the pool and I just think that part of the problem here is, we put in, made the driveway bigger and then had the flat part. Came in for a building permit for the garage. And then that's when they asked us to get a survey because they thought it was too steep, and you know we kept looking at the house down the street going well, you know this isn't nearly as steep as what the house is down there, so there shouldn't be any problem. We had the survey done, submitted it and it came back. Well you have to get a variance. And when we talked, I said well what caused the house down the street to get a variance. Well they're not on a slope and, or on the bluff and I said, that's impossible. There's no way and I think if you look at the topography and you follow it across, you know I mean, it just comes down to it's up, and when Sharmeen told me that it's up to your surveyor. Steve Monson: Yeah, just like our survey you know, it's just 2 feet either way you know. It could be plus or minus however the surveyor set up where he's taken the actual or put the stake you know and shoots it. You know if he was over 1 foot farther this way or towards the slope or towards the back and down at the toe, you know. Where is he on the toe? I mean we're only 2 feet, saying that we're on a bluff. Sacchet: So it's pretty much borderline is what you're saying? 16 Planning Commission ating —October 19, 2004 is Steve Monson: Yeah, I mean it's just, and that's the same way is with this other guy's house down there. He had the surveyor come in there. You know where did that guy shoot all the elevations to get that all figured out? Nobody ever could buy that land over there because it was straight down. You know then somehow they finagled the survey to make it that it's not in a bluff. That house is on stilts. Sacchet: You're referring to the house to the northwest of you or? Steve Monson: It's to the west. It's right on the same bluff. Just follow that bluff around. So it's to the west. Sacchet: Yeah, west. Over there. Okay, the skinny one. Steve Monson: But that's where, I think what it comes all down to is, how can you, when I talked to Dan Remer, you know I mean he says, well where did he shoot the height from. You know because it's such a small amount. I mean we could have the guy go out there the next day and say, you know hold your stick over here or hold it over there, and all we're just shooting from the hip. We didn't know if the, now we just had to get a surveyor out there to take a look at it and now if we could ... I suppose if we could have told him where to put the stick you know. Sacchet: Put the stake in a different spot. Steve Monson: Then you know I guess the, getting back to, you know everybody says we did this after the fact or they put the retaining walls in first and then got the, well we never had to call to get a, we called to find out about retaining walls but you don't have to get a permit unless it's, so we weren't doing this to spite. Sacchet: You even inquired about the retaining wall then? Mary Pat Monson: We did. We called the building department and they said that as long as the retaining wall's under 4 feet, it's not attached to the house and you're not encroaching on another property line, you don't need a building pen -nit. So when you've got 2'h acres, you've obviously not encroaching. It didn't touch the house and it was under 3 feet so you know. Sacchet: Yeah, we understand that part. Anything else you'd like to add from your end. Steve Monson: No, thanks a lot. Sacchet: Or do we have any questions for you guys? Claybaugh: Did you hire an excavator to perform the work? 17 Planning Commission ting — October 19, 2004 • Steve Monson: No, I didn't it in conjunction with just a friend of mine. We had, you know a Bobcat and you know. And we just, we all talked about the permit so that's why we called. Sacchet: Any other questions of the applicant? No? Thank you very much. Now this is a public hearing. If anybody wants to come forward and comment to this issue in front of us, we'd appreciate it. Yeah, looks like we have some takers. If you want to give us your name and address for the record. Dennis Chadderdon: My name is Dennis Chadderdon and I live at 8900 Audubon, just to the south of the Monson's. Sacchet: You're right south, okay. Dennis Chadderdon: Right. I built there 2 years ago and I watched the work that Steve was doing to prepare for this and he had talked, he was going to put the driveway there and I didn't have a problem with it at all. Yeah, this is my property right here. Sacchet: The other half. Slagle: You've got the tuck under garage? Dennis Chadderdon: Yes I do, yep. As far as vegetation goes, that whole hill is completely vegetated over. From when was it, June? When this happened. There's been no erosion. That's one of the things that was a big deal when I was building my home, was that they were talking about watershed and how much water would come off that hill. I have a 24 inch culvert that goes underneath my driveway which you could crawl through there. I mean it's huge, and the water running off of his property, I have never had any streams, any ruts or anything coming off of there. And none of the dirt has moved either, and we've got a couple of real good rains you know since then so erosion in my mind is not a problem for them there. Other than that, I have no problem with them doing what he's doing. I don't think it's going to be an eye sore or anything like that from my point of view so just thought I'd give you my thoughts on that. Sacchet: Appreciate it. Thank you very much. Anybody else wants to address this item? Seeing nobody getting up, I'll close the public hearing. Bring it back to commissioners. Discussion. Comments. Anybody want to jump in? Steve. Lillehaug: I suppose I can. I actually, I support the variance request and I'll give you my reasoning. If you look at the contour plan that's in our packet here, I do the elevation difference off of contours and boy, it's right on the bubble and I would expect staff to do the same thing they did for this report. Very good job on the report. That's the purpose is I think this is right on the bubble and so I appreciate you guys bringing it in front of us but I do support it and the reasoning would be is it's, one. It's right on the bubble and what's the reason behind protecting the bluff? You know I think it's to protect the sightlines of the bluff, etc, and if you look where this garage is going, it's going down the FF Planning Commission Sting — October 19, 2004 Is slope 8 feet plus or minus, and the top of the building, what's it going to cover up? It's going to cover up their driveway, their house and their garage so I really don't see it being a huge impact to the bluff. Do they have any other reasonable options? I don't believe they do. They have one flat spot on their property, but they don't have any way to provide access to it. 2.5 acres, I think it's reasonable to put another garage on a property that size. Everything I'm seeing, you know I don't see anything that was done intentionally trying to skirt the bluff ordinance by Mr. and Mrs. Monson so I'm in support of it. Sacchet: That's good. Anybody else wants to comment or any discussion points? Papke: As is the tradition I will, I take the opposite stance. I believe in this particular case the, given the proximity to Bluff Creek, I think it would have been prudent before doing the excavation, just to call the city and say geez, we're 200 feet above the creek, or 200 feet away from the creek or so. We're on the side of a hill. Is there anything we need to do? It just would have been prudent. Mary Pat Monson: We're 400 feet, we measured it. Papke: 400 feet, I'm sorry. It's a small map. But it's still, it's, it is up the hill from the creek and granted there's a lot of vegetation there. But, and I agree with Steve that certainly on a plot of that size, it would certainly be nice to have another garage added on to my 3 car garage, but I don't think that constitutes a hardship so I don't support this variance. Sacchet: Thanks. Any other comments? You want to say something Craig? Claybaugh: Yeah. I agree with Commissioner Lillehaug that, in terms of calculations that the bluff is debatable. We're on the bubble. I believe that the applicant attempted to do due diligence within their experience with land issues and construction. It is large lot property. I don't see a problem with having an additional structure on the site. It's one of the benefits of living on a large lot. And with respect to hardship, once a person gets down the road that far with respect to planning and the rest of it, I personally am not prepared to penalize the applicant having found that they have tried to do due diligence and didn't get here as Commissioner Lillehaug commented by trying to skirt any of the bluff issues so within that context I'm prepare to support the applicant. Sacchet: Okay. Does staff agree that this is somewhat on the bubble? Somewhat a border line case. Al -Jaffa I believe that to follow, for the registered land surveyor, I think that's why we hire them, or the applicant would hire them in this case. Because they're professional. Lillehaug: Close? Sacchet: Close. 19 Planning Commission lating — October 19, 2004 • Lillehaug: Close may be a better term. Sacchet: It's close. Claybaugh: Marginal. Sacchet: Marginally close. Well it's good we hear the neighbor to the south is okay with it. It's a tricky thing. I mean we're kind of punishing the honest one here, which is not a desirable thing. Then on the other hand yeah Kurt, you have a point. I mean we know that Bluff Creek is a sensitive thing and I'm sure it's one of the amenities that you actually enjoy there, living in that particular place. We need how much of a vote for this to pass, or what is it? Al -Jaffa Only one of you can go against it. Sacchet: Only one. How about if one abstains? Al -Jaffa Then it's a recommendation and it goes back to City Council. Sacchet: Then it goes to council. Because I'm struggling with, is whether maybe this should go to council frankly. I mean I really sympathize with the applicant personally. I think it's very obvious that the applicant did everything possible to do the right thing and I don't see anything there that, I mean yes, it was done without a permit but it didn't need a permit per se, except that it's in a bluff and they were not aware it was in a bluff. Now should they have known it's in a bluff? Well, they didn't. Now they do. It probably wasn't a very pleasant surprise to find out this way. Also what I'm struggling with is, I mean to restore this is going to have an additional impact, probably more detrimental impact environmentally than what was done so far. Now, then we can say how much of that runoff is a real issue. How would they treat that runoff? Would they catch it? I mean is that something that we looked at how this could be mitigated? I mean because runoff seems to be the real issue, right? Saam: Yeah, runoff would lead to erosion and they're all kind of intertwined. Lillehaug: I think erosion would be more of the term. Sacchet: Yeah, not the runoff. The erosion. Lillehaug: The erosion I think is the concern, in my mind. Sacchet: It is, and do we know how it slopes? The applicant actually is allowed to speak just about at any time so if you want to add something. pill Planning Commission Wing —October 19, 2004 • Steve Monson: Yeah, just a matter of fact. I had talked to Schoells and Madsen, you know they're engineers on, taking care of the water runoff and all that kind of thing and he even talked to Bob. Sacchet: Bob Generous, yep. Steve Monson: Jerry over there. He talked to him about a way we can take care of it, there's water that runs off. There's a system that we do where you dig a big trench behind the garage, or on the south side of the garage. Sacchet: The down slope. Steve Monson: A big trench. Fill it with rock or whatever. But they'd do it. They'd design it and. Sacchet: Catch it, yeah. Steve Monson: And then catch the water so it goes into the ground, and down. Instead of just rushing down the hill. You'd have to have gutters on the garage, and then slope the front around, it kind of goes ... in a comer with this big trench he dug out. Sacchet: Is there enough room the way it is now with the retaining wall that you would have room to put like a gravel type of catch for the water? Steve Monson: Yeah, we've already, they've looked at it and we've already, we can do that. Sacchet: So is that, okay. So that would fit actually. Steve Monson: And it was working and it'd be a good catch basin to catch all the water coming down the hill and go into there and then into the ground. Sacchet: Appreciate it. Good addition here. From engineering's viewpoint, how valuable is what he's actually describing here? Saam: I think he's describing some sort of French drain type system. Gutters draining into it and yeah, that's something we talked about when we were out on site. If it was approved, how could we take care of the runoff. Instead of just letting it spill right off the roof right down a steep slope. And it was, what we had talked about was something like that with a pipe or gutters or some sort of system like that, where we drain it out at the bottom of a hill possibly, or into the ditch. Lillehaug: Commissioner Sacchet. Sacchet: Go ahead. 21 Planning Commission Seting — October 19, 2004 • Lillehaug: You know how do you, looking the whole bluff, how do you view that bluff . You know just to me it's right on the bubble for the entire bluff around, all the way to the west and around to the north. I mean do you see this area as a different portion of the bluff that we need to preserve as compared to where they just built that house 3 years back? You know what are we really trying to do here? I mean two properties down they built a house on approximately the same bluff. Here we're getting into the bluff by about 8 feet. You know to me the significance of it isn't any more, or it's actually less than building that house on the. Sacchet: Well we don't have clear data on the house. I heard staff say it wasn't exactly... Claybaugh: But this goes back to the footprint. This is a much greater impact. Sacchet: Yes, in terms of size wise. Lillehaug: Just looking at the hill, I mean to me it's, it might not be a bluff where that house was built and here it's obviously it's pretty close to being a bluff, or it is a bluff, but the whole character of the whole side of the hill, I mean to me it doesn't change and why penalize Mr. Monson. Mr. and Mrs. Monson, I guess I'm not going to say any more on it. You know my opinion. Sacchet: I hear it. I hear, and it's... Steve Monson: If you want I have pictures of that house he's talking about. Sacchet: Do you want to put it on the table there? Do you want to help him Sharmeen to put in the right spot? Okay. Just tum them upside down and then we see it upside down. So that's the other house that. Steve Monson: Another view we're talking about. Sacchet: Yeah, and those are bigger retaining walls than your's. Steve Monson: Well it's just more, way more of a slope. The guy has a driveway that cuts back like this to get down to his house. That's what is so, I mean that's the street here and he's got his driveway there. It cuts back 3 different times before he gets down there. Sacchet: Okay. Yeah, okay. Thank you. Well, I think if we can put in a very clear condition of that gravel type of catch of water, I would consider this reasonable enough to pass it through. That's my personal opinion of this. Now I'm not necessarily going to be in a position to formulate exactly how we would phrase that particular condition. Claybaugh: Something like capturing it with a French drain. 22 Planning Commission ting — October 19, 2004 • Sacchet: The French drain is the term that expresses it clearly? Okay. Alright. Now, my main concern is the precedent aspect. The hardship, it's reasonable under the circumstances from many different angles. But the precedence part, how can we, does that need to be more balanced? Is there any comments from fellow commissioners on that? Claybaugh: I think whether, we had someone come in before that was looking at putting in a pool or a Sport Court and they had done something previously and they got into being over the hard surface allowance. I think every time we've run into these we've looked at it, whether someone was trying to skirt a code or ordinance issue versus someone trying and attempting to the best of their ability to do due diligence with what's in front of them. Sacchet: Yeah, it's pretty clear that we have due diligence here. Claybaugh: Beyond that I don't think we've ever been able to articulate anything. Sacchet: Alright. Somebody want to formulate a motion? Lillehaug: I'll make a motion the Planning Commission approves Variance 04-33 for the construction of a garage/storage building in a bluff as shown on the plans stamped "Received June 22, 2004" with the following conditions, I through 10. And then I 1 as, that Matt could maybe clarify and elaborate on to deal with the runoff and erosion from the building. Sacchet: French drain. Slagle: And gutters. Lillehaug: And gutters, yep. Claybaugh: Why don't we say French drain system? Sacchet: French drain system, is that what you call it? French drain system. Yeah, let's use that. Claybaugh: Can we also add that they're coordinate that with staff? Sacchet: Coordinate that with staff, okay. So that would be, have to be submitted in terms of a plan to get the permit. Claybaugh: Prefer that. Saam: Yeah, we already have the survey required so we'll just work with them off of that to make sure the French drain gets incorporated in that. %7t] Planning Commission lating — October 19, 2004 • Claybaugh: But with respect to the design of the French drain system, if that could be required to be submitted to staff or engineering for approval. Sacchet: Is that an acceptable friendly amendment Steve? Lillehaug: Yes. Sacchet: Ahight. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Claybaugh: Second. Lillehaug moved, Claybaugh seconded that the Planning Commission approves Variance #04-33 for the construction of a garagetstorage building in a bluff as shown on the plans stamped "Received June 22,2004", with the following conditions: 1. A building permit must be applied for within one year of approval of the variance or it shall become void. 2. The proposed addition must be built per plans stamped "Received June 22, 2004". 3. The applicant must submit plans for the ramp before proceeding with construction. 4. An after the fact building permit for grading must be applied for. The graded slope must a entirely reinforced with a retaining wall which will require a building permit; or must be restored to a slope less than 3:1. 6. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (maxmmm time an area can remain unveg'tated when area is not actio be' worked Steeper than 3:1 7 Days 10:1 to 3:1 14 Days Flatter than 10:1 21 Days These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man-made system that discharges to any surface water. Permanent native vegetation shall be installed on the slopes to minimize the potential for future slope failure. 24 Planning Commission Oting — October 19, 2004 • 8. Submit an existing topographic survey signed by an RIS (registered land surveyor). The survey must show the following: a. Location of the retaining wall with top and bottom elevations. b. Driveway location and slope. c. Garage floor elevation. 9. The driveway must be hard surfaced and comply with City Code Sec. 20-1122 (attached). 10. No home occupation or business use will be permitted in the existing attached garage or proposed detached garagelstorage building, as stated in City Code 20- 977: "...No garage or accessory buildings except accessory agriculture buildings existing on February 19, 1987 shall be used for any home occupation." 11. The applicant shall submit for staff approval and construct a French drainage system, along with gutters on the garagetstorage building. All voted in favor, except Papke who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. PUBLIC HEARING: ARBORETUM SHOPPING CENTER PUD AMENDMENT TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONVENIENCE USES (CENTURY PLAZA RETAH CENTER), PLANNING CASE NO. 04-35. Public Present: Name Address Paul Andrescik 710 Debbie Lane, Carver Timothy Bohlman 7500 W. 78th Street, Edina Sharmeen Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Sacchet: Yes, this is questions. You can ask questions of staff, go ahead. Tjomhom: I have a question Sharmeen. When you say health and physical exercise clubs, do you also mean like Curves? Places like that. Would they be included in those? You know what I'm saying when I mention Curves? AI -Jaffa Yes. 25 o4-33 0 i Affidavit of Publication Southwest Suburban Publishing State of Minnesota) )SS. County of Carver ) RATE INFORMATION Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space.... $22.00 per column inch Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ................................ $22.00 per column inch Rate actually charged for the above matter ............................................... $10.85 per column inch SCANNED Laurie A. Hartmann, being duly swom, 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- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: PLANNING CASE NO. 04-33 'CITY OF CHANHASSEN (A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 33 1A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as the Chanhassen Planning amended. Commission will hold a public v2 �O hearing on Tuesday, October 19, 2004, (B) The printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No. at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice and said in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is thebluconsider ananrequest avariance to the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both ofor the bluff ordinance allow grading inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as the kind and size of used in the composition Notice: g g type and construction of a garage/storage a and publication of the area located at 8850 Audubon Road. Applicant: Steve Monson. abcdefghijklmnopgntuvwxyz A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review at City Hall during regular business L. hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing Laurie A. Hartmann andexpress theiropinions withrespect to this proposal. Josh Metzer, Planning Intem Subscribed and swom before me on Email: imetzerr ci.chanhassen tun us Phone: 952-227- ..NN tAi 1132 (Published in the Chanhassen this day ofyz , 2004 ..rwrrwwM VillageronThursday,October7,2004; <iYVEI'1 M. RQUEW No. 4282) 19 E4fgTMV PUBLIC MMd1ES0TA My Canmi w Expm Jan. 3t, 21105 1 Notary Public RATE INFORMATION Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space.... $22.00 per column inch Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ................................ $22.00 per column inch Rate actually charged for the above matter ............................................... $10.85 per column inch SCANNED �.J CITY OF CHANHASSEN 0 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on October 7, 2004, 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 Variance to Bluff Ordinance on property located at 8850 Audubon Road, Steve Monson — Planning Case No. 04-33 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 thiso gtNay of No& miter- , 2004. I Notary Pu lic iL.LLvi� fit.( -1 Karoli J. Enge6hdt, Dep ty Clerk LpKIM T MEUWISSEN NptaryPublic-MinnesotaCAOER COUNTY Comm ssion Exd� 1 %Jt12005vvvvWvv $CAW" Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for a variance to the bluff ordinance to allow grading Proposal: and construction of a garage/storage area Planning File: 04-33 Applicant: Steve Monson Property 8850 Audubon Road 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 at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., - Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about Questions & this project, please contact Josh Metzer at 952-227-1132 or e - Comments: mail imetzer@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. 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. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that Includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/industrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard, Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have 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, October 19 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for a variance to the bluff ordinance to allow grading Proposal: and construction of a garage/storage area Planning File: 04-33 Applicant: Steve Monson Property 8850 Audubon Road 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 lea public hearing through the following steps: What Happens at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about Questions & this project, please contact Josh Metzer at 952-227-1132 or e - Comments: mail imetzer@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. 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. 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 th� Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notifie 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 commerclal4ndustrial. • 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 somethina to be included in the report, lease contact the Plannino Staff person named on the notification. 0 Subject Property r This map is neither a legally recorded that, nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in venous city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purPosss only. The Qty does not mhant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this note are error tree, and the City does not represent Nat me GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any either purpose requiring enacting rtaasurement of distance or direction or VMS. in the depiction of geographic features. 6 errors or dscrepancies are found Please contact 562-2271107. The preceding disdarrar is provided pursuant to Minnesota Salutes §,166,03. Suited. 21 (2000), antl the user of this map acknowledges that the City Shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all dour s, and agrees to defend, indemnity. and hold ha"ess the City horn any and all cents brought by User, its employees or agents, or mind parties which ansa out of the users access or use of data provided. This that, is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. TMs map is a correlation of records, information and dam located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The Dry 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, insetting or any Other purpose requiring exacting Wasurenent of distance or direction or precision in me depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepancies are found please contact 562-2271102 The preceding discerner is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.09, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this that acknowledges Nat Me City shall not be liable for any damages, and etpressly waives all claims, and agrees to defend, inderunify, and hold harmless the City from any and all daims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third Parties which arise tut of the users access or use of data provided. Public HearingCotification Area Oap (500 feet) Monson Variance 8850 Audubon Road City of Chanhassen Planning Case No. 04-33 Subject Property 0 F--I L-A PATRICK L & SHARON M ARBOGAST JACK R BECKER & LARRY B BENNETT 1801 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S DEBRA J TRONES 8950 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1751 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CYNTHIA F BONGARD,TRUSTEE & JAMES A BERNARDS,TRUSTEE 8831 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL J & JOANNE COCHRANE 1751 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHRIS B & LESLIE J ERICKSON 1831 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 THOMAS A & SUSAN A KODET 1741 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 P SCOTT & JENNIFER G PHARIS 1815 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PATRICK WALSH & MEREDITH E SANDSTROM 8731 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 TIMOTHY C BOYCE & TANA I ERICKSON 8941 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DANIEL K & ROBIN L EDMUNDS 1861 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BRUCE H & CLARICE G FEIK 1773 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 STEPJEN J & MARY P MONSON 8850 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JOHN T & JANET K ST ANDREW 1811 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RICH SLAGLE 7411 FAWN HILL ROAD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DENNIS & RUTH CHADDERDON 8900 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RONALD W & CAROL M ENTINGER 8851 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DEBORAH A HUM & THOMAS O MAU 1761 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JEFFREY W & GAIL H MOODY 1800 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SALLY E STUCKEY 1785 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 I CITY OF CHANHASSEN . • 7700 MARKET BLVD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Payee: STEPHEN MONSON Date: 03/21/2005 Time: 11:43am Receipt Number: DW / 5974 Clerk: DANIELLE GIS LIST #04-33 ITEM REFERENCE ------------------------------------------- AMOUNT GIS GIS LIST #04-33 GIS LIST 57.00 Total: --------------- 57.00 Check 6711 57.00 Change: --------------- 0.00 THANK YOU FOR YOUR PAYMENT! 6q-33 SCANNED City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 CM OF (952) 227-1100 amm To: Steve Monson 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Ship To: Invoice SALESPERSON DATE TERMS KTM 10-7-04 upon receipt QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT 9Property Owners List within 500' of 8850 Audubon Road (19 labels) $3.00 $57.00 TOTAL DUE Make all checks payable to: City of Chanhassen Please write the following code on your check: Planning Case #04-33. If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! S57.00 Meuwissen, Kim • • From: Meuwissen, Kim Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 9:43 AM To: AI-Jaff, Sharmeen Cc: Aanenson, Kate; Metzer, Josh; Generous, Bob Subject: FW: Delinquent Invoice for Monson Variance 04-33 Sharmeen, Kate thought it would be best if you contacted him since he knows you. Please see me for the documentation. Thanks! Kim Meuwissen Planning Secretary City of Chanhassen 952-227-1107 From: Roger Knutson [mailto:RKnutson@ck-law.com] Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 1:47 PM To: Meuwissen, Kim Subject: RE: Delinquent Invoice for Monson Variance 04-33 Kim, I suggest calling him. You could take him to conciliation court but the effort would be too much for the amount involved. If a phone call doesn't work I would write it off -----Original Message ----- From: Meuwissen, Kim [mailto:kmeuwissen@ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 1:58 PM To: Roger Knutson Cc: Aanenson, Kate; Metzer, Josh Subject: Delinquent Invoice for Monson Variance 04-33 Roger, Kate directed me to contact you for advice regarding a delinquent invoice for a variance. The variance was granted, drafted and recorded but the applicant, Steve Monson, still owes the City $57 for a required property owners list for mailing public hearing notices. 10/7/04 — Original invoice mailed . 12/1/04 — Second notice mailed . 2/10/04 — Third notice with letter (attached) Should I keep trying to collect or just let it go? Let me know if you have questions or need additional information. Kim Meuwissen Planning Secretary City of Chanhassen 952-227-1107 3/17/2005 Meuwissen, Kim • • From: Meuwissen, Kim Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 1:58 PM To: Knutson, Roger Cc: Aanenson, Kate; Metzer, Josh Subject: Delinquent Invoice for Monson Variance 04-33 Roger, Kate directed me to contact you for advice regarding a delinquent invoice for a variance. The variance was granted, drafted and recorded but the applicant, Steve Monson, still owes the City $57 for a required property owners list for mailing public hearing notices. 10/7/04 — Original invoice mailed . 12/1/04 — Second notice mailed . 2/10/04 — Third notice with letter (attached) Should I keep trying to collect or just let it go? Let me know if you have questions or need additional information. Kim Meuwissen Planning Secretary City of Chanhassen 952-227-1107 3/11/2005 February 10, 2005 CITY OF CHOIRSSEN Mr. Steve Monson 8850 Audubon Road 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 - Re: Invoice for Property Owners List for Variance Request — THIRD NOTICE Administration Planning Case No. 04-33 Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Dear Mr. Monson: Building Inspections P 2100 Fax: 952.227.1190 Attached is a past due invoice for the property owners list for your variance request. As stated on your development review application (attached), mailing Engineering labels of all property owners within at least 500 feet of the boundaries of the Phone: 522.227 7,1170 property must be included with the application OR the City can provide this list Fax: 952 227,1170 for an additional fee to be invoiced to the applicant. Please remit payment as Finance soon as possible. Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952 227.1110 If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 952-227-1107 or by email at Park& Recreation kmeuwissen@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Sincerely, Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard 1 , Phone.2400 Fax: 952.2.227.1427.1404 t Planning & Natural Resources Kim T. Meuwissen Phone: 952.227.1130 Planning Secretary Fax: 952227.1110 Public Warks KTM:ms 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Encs. Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior center c: Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner Phone: 952.227.1125 Josh Metzer, Planner I Fax: 952227.1110 g:\p1an\2004 planning casesV4-33 - monson variance -8850 audubon road\invoice letter.doc Web Site wwwoi.chanhassen.omus {CANNED The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautilul parks. A great place to live, work, and play. City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 aff OF (952) 227-1100 CHMS91 To: Steve Monson 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Ship To: 0 Invoice SALESPERSON DATE TERMS KTM 10-7-04 upon receipt 19 1 Property Owners List within 500' of 8850 TOTAL DUE Make all checks payable to: City of Chanhassen Please write the following code on your check: Planning Case #04-33. If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! $3.00 1 $57.00 S57.00 Meuwissen, Kim • • From: Meuwissen, Kim Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 11:02 AM To: Aanenson, Kate Cc: Metzer, Josh Subject: Monson Variance Kate/Josh: I invoice Steve Monson for property owners list in the amount of $57 on 10-7-04. 1 sent a second notice on 12-1-04. 1 still have not received payment. Should I send out another notice? His variance was sent to Roger's office for recording on 11-16-04. Please advise. Kim Meuwissen Planning Secretary City of Chanhassen 952-227-1107 1/24/2005 Meuwissen, Kim • From: Meuwissen, Kim Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 11:02 AM To: Aanenson, Kate Cc: Metzer, Josh Subject: Monson Variance Kate/Josh: I invoice Steve Monson for property owners list in the amount of $57 on 10-7-04. 1 sent a second notice on 12-1-04. 1 still have not received payment. Should I send out another notice? His variance was sent to Roger's office for recording on 11-16-04. Please advise. Kim Meuwissen Planning Secretary City of Chanhassen 952-227-1107 1/21/2005 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 MY OF (952) 227-1100 To: Steve Monson 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Ship To: 11 Invoice SALESPERSON DATE TERMS KTM 10-7-04 upon receipt QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 19 Property Owners List within 500' of 8850 Audubon Road (19 labels) $3.00 $57.00 TOTAL DUE $57.00 Make all checks payable to: City of Chanhassen Please write the following code on your check: Planning Case #0433. If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 aff OF (952) 227-1100 To: Steve Monson 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Ship To: 0 Invoice SALESPERSON DATE TERMS KTM 10-7-04 upon receipt Make all checks payable to: City of Chanhassen Please write the following code on your check: Planning Case #04-33. If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! Public Hearing4hotification Area Map (500 feet) Monson Variance 8850 Audubon Road City of Chanhassen Planning Case No. 04-33 Subject Property PATRICK L & SHARON M ARBOGAST 1801 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CYNTHIA F BONGARD,TRUSTEE & JAMES A BERNARDS,TRUSTEE 8831 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL J & JOANNE COCHRANE 1751 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHRIS B & LESLIE J ERICKSON 1831 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 THOMAS A & SUSAN A KODET 1741 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 P SCOTT & JENNIFER G PHARIS 1815 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PATRICK WALSH & MEREDITH E SANDSTROM 8731 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 0 0 JACK R BECKER & DEBRA JTRONES 1751 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 TIMOTHY C BOYCE & TANA I ERICKSON 8941 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DANIEL K & ROBIN L EDMUNDS 1861 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BRUCE H & CLARICE G FEIK 1773 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 STEPJEN J & MARY P MONSON 8850 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JOHN T & JANET K ST ANDREW 1811 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 LARRY B BENNETT 8950 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DENNIS & RUTH CHADDERDON 8900 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RONALD W & CAROL M ENTINGER 8851 AUDUBON RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DEBORAH A HUM & THOMAS O MAU 1761 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JEFFREY W & GAIL H MOODY 1800 SUNRIDGE CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SALLY E STUCKEY 1785 VALLEY RIDGE TRL S CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 MARKET BLVD k17 CHANHASSEN MN Payee: STEPHEN J MONSON Date: 09/20/2004 Time: 8:36am Receipt Number: EE / 5389 Clerk: BETTY VARIANCE APPLICATION FEE ITEM REFERENCE ------------------------------------------- AMOUNT DEVAP VARIANCE APPLICATION USE & VARIANCE 200.00 --------------- Total: 200.00 Check 6437 200.00 --------------- Change: 0.00 THANK YOU FOR YOUR PAYMENT! • G N 3.3 SCARF¢:. • CITY OF CHANHASSEN • 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952)227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION t _ '�• TELEPHONE•. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 0L+-33 RECEIVED SEP 17 2004 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT • tf� ON•ti�_ rill ✓ 1 r TELEPHONE:_ i� • , 77i Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements Interim Use Permit Variance Non -conforming Use Permit Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development` Zoning Appeal Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Notification Sign Site Plan Review` X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" - $50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes & Bounds - $400 Minor SUB Subdivision' TOTAL FEE $ Mailing labels of all property owners within at least 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application -OR- the City can provide this list (Carver County properties only) for an additional fee to be invoiced to the applicant. If you would like the City to provide mailing labels, check this box k Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. 'Twenty-six (26) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. SCANNED PROJECT N LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: TOTAL ACREAGE: �2• 5 WETLANDS PRESENT: YES NO PRESENT ZONING: "I REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: � (NGA A v-\ 0-,9— Arp ,.3)1 � A Or\ h\ y3� This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owners Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proc d with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowle e. f 1,7- d C/ Si Wure of Applicant Date Signature of Fee Owner {L Date �/�/ J� Application Received on �� r Fee Paid (�U/37 Receipt No. / /y l o T The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Thursday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. GAplanVOrt \Developm t Review Application.DOC 0 0 RECEIVED To: Chanhassen Planning Commission/Staff SEP 17 2004 From: Steve & Mary Pat Monson CITY OFCHANHASSEN Address: 8850 Audubon Road Re: Variance to build garage/storage on bluff We are requesting a variance to build on what is considered by Ordinance a bluff area, listed below are the issues concerning the property and why we feel this is the best possible place to locate the structure. Background Information: In 1997 we wanted to divided the 5 acres we owned into two- 2.5 acre lots as permitted by the city, the original plan was to divide the 5 acres north and south with a common driveway coming in off of Audubon at the south end of the property, which would have allowed flat area's for both lots. The city asked us to change the plotting of the 5 acres to run east and west, which is what we did. Now that leaves us with 2.5 acres almost entirely on what is considered a bluff. Our property is zoned RR, Rural Residential. We own 2.5 acres this acreage is surrounded on 3 sides by other property owners and Audubon Road, 90% of the property is on a hill. Our neighbors to the south and west also have 2.5 acre lots, the house to the north we believe is an acre lot. We believe there is only two other area's on our property that may not be considered bluff area's however there isn't access to those area's without crossing through someone else's property to get to it. We are asking for a variance to place a garage with storage just south of our existing driveway. We do not believe the properties in our same zone have the same issues we have. The purpose of the variance is to be able to use with reasonable expectation some of the 2.5 acreage that we own, i.e. out buildings, garages and other structure are within the limitations of the zoning in our area. Our hardship is created by the unique percentage of the property that is located on the bluff. We want to build this structure to store pool equipment and out door furniture that is currently being stored behind our house under tarps in the winter, which is directly below the hill from our neighbors to the north. We believe they would rather not view the tarps, the new structures would not be in view of their home at all. The neighbors to the south are far below the structure. The structure would not block or obstruct views from any of the neighbors. The structure does not impair any air flow, light source to other property owners. It does not add congestion to the street and it is not a fire danger or public safety issue. In closing, we do not believe the structure has any impact on our neighbors except to enclose what we already have stored in the back yard. It does not impact the hill, we did not take down any trees or create an erosion area. Due to the large tree next to the driveway on Audubon we do not believe anyone will see the garage from Audubon. We believe with our 2.5 acres it is with reasonable expectation to be able to build a structure that we can access. SCANNED 0 Land t Surveyor, Frank R. Cardare e Inc. 6440 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Bus. Phone: (952) 941-3031 Home Phone: (952) 929-2761 Fax/Phone: (952) 941-3030 Scale: 1"=100' (612) 941-3031 (ter of iro u ®t 0 Survey For Steve Monson 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: 361-0957 coy or. iir'€UVGDSSEN NOV 0 3 2004 �G�NEERING DEPT• p.. VIP 6' . 465.24' 'K .. .. - g 87048'56" E' . . uArea fort e o well „�•/ x,'�ay C Draing• iJerr in 17 4 if neral 9� PARCEL `a` }a 2.5 Cres a NO O 'vim e,• od`• \ `$'O S� Aa• '.,..�.. _ O.y�u •Ped((�. y M: q7 4 P, lai I�lz of � q "all . S 7l4" W Drainage & Utility ^easement _L A. PARCEL II �z.5 Acres / 69, 8, gyp• �: �� \ / . - 98.61 ti Land Surveyor Eden Prairie, MN 55344 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY & AERIAL SURVEY FROM F° CITY OF CHAN14ASSEN Description: Parcel I: That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Carver County,Minnesota, described as lying Northeasterly of a line described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 353.03 feet Southerly of the Northeast corner of said Lot 2; thence North- westerly to a point on the Westerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 130.50 feet Southerly from the Northwest corner of said Lot 2 and there terminating. Subject to a roadway easement over the Easterly 17 feet of said parcel adjacent to Audubon Road. Subject to a drainage and utility easement over the Southerly and South- westerly 6 feet adjacent to the Southwesterly line of said parcel. Parcel II: Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge, except that part lying Northeasterly of a line described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 353.03 feet Southerly of the North- east corner of said Lot 2; thence Northwesterly to a point on the Westerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 130.50 feet Southerly from the Northwest corner of said Lot 2 and there terminating, together with: That part of Lot 1, Block.l,Sun Ridge Third Addition, Carver County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying Northerly, Northeasterly and Easterly of the following described line: Beginning at the most Easterly corner of said Lot 1, Block.l,Sun Ridge Third Addition; thence North 69 degrees 51 minutes 18 seconds West along the Northerly line of said Lot 1 a distance of 87.00.feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 56 degrees 53 minutes 53 seconds East a distance of 89.20 feet to a point on the Northwesterly right-of-way line of Audubon Road, and said line there terminating said point of termination being 20.00 feet Southwesterly of the said most Easterly corner of said Lot 1, Block 1, Sun Ridge Third Addition, as measured along the said right-of-wav line of Audubon Rnad- S+,hje * to =roadway c-^-- ment over the Easterly 17 feet of said parcel adjacent to Audubon Road. Subject to a drainage and utility easement over the Northerly and Northeasterly 6 feet adjacent to the Northeasterly line of said parcel. This plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota. Signed this J ZTw day of��, 1997. dt FrQr�k1R. C arelle State Reg.License No. 6508 NOTES: Area: Parcel I - 108.900 sq.ft. 2.5 acres Parcel Il 108.936 sq.ft. 2.5 acres Sewer drain field area approved by Jeff Swedlund. CITY OFA,, -.+r R `�A' SSEN AUG 1 2 2004 ENGINEERihu DEPT $CANNED IL te\ PROPOSED LOT.DIVISION:..: LOt:.2, Block l,SunRidgeLand FOR: Steve Monson Frank R. CardarbSurveyor. 6440 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 (612) 941-3031 Scale 1"=100' Revisions Drawn Bv I Date Date 9/15/1997 r o ow 6-FT FRC Gkd mw n JoNe o. It Ile If Ilz -ia- 9F m Yo 309so-it Pace_ _..a ..... = 01°40'35 R = 5781.99 T = 84.59' L = 169.18' CITY OFA,, -.+r R `�A' SSEN AUG 1 2 2004 ENGINEERihu DEPT $CANNED IL te\ PROPOSED LOT.DIVISION:..: LOt:.2, Block l,SunRidgeLand FOR: Steve Monson Frank R. CardarbSurveyor. 6440 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 (612) 941-3031 Scale 1"=100' Revisions Drawn Bv I Date Date 9/15/1997 r o ow 6-FT FRC Gkd mw n JoNe o. It Ile If Ilz -ia- 9F m Yo 309so-it Pace_ _..a ..... zC OO UU 0 0 :::E k 10 �� , Z §£� ||§! §/ U � a - //; @ z /2 $� 0P,:z /| d) )q'\&\ 3a; 0 0 :::E k 0 9� ! :* k FRANK R. CARDARELLE Land surveyor, Inc. Land 6urvuyc; 941-3031 6440 Flying Cloud Drives Eden Prairie, MN 5534 6VT6-c of ira u Of Survey For Steve Monson Book Page File r3nA 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: 361-0957 is I Description: Parcel I: That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Carver County, Minnesota, described as lying Northeasterly of a line described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 353.03 feet Southerly of the Northeast corner of said Lot 2; thence North- westerly to a point on the Westerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 130.50 feet Southerly from the Northwest corner of said Lot 2 and there terminating. Subject to a roadway easement over the �— Easterly 17 feet of said parcel adjacent to Audubon Road. Subject to a drainage and utility easement over the Southerly and South- Scale: 1"=60' westerly 6 feet adjacent to the Southwesterly line of said parcel. Denotes Iron Mon.Found �..�.Proposed Retaining Walls • 906.0 This plan, specification or report was Prop.60'D Drioorve @10%Elevrade prepared by me or under my direct super- Ret.Wa0 Drive @10% Grade 912.0 vision, and that I am a duly Registered LoweraWall Land Surveyor fn the State of Minnesota. Lower Wall 910.0 Prop. Y 6' Higher Wall 916.0 Prop. Signed this 2 d day of ptember, 2004. Frank R. Car arelle - 6' ,: State Reg. License No. 6508 r 6, �I CITY OF Clod j,+11ASSEN SEP 0 3 2004 IJ'� � 4i, � rte, .• 1-h f -I m I ENGINEERING DEPT. l y VI ib O�I 00 0.1 (D �p � - z - K- -- Ico Pool - I I P • � 1 ,�.Qy Y M 0,00 p ro O F ares °sed c r c.r� ams � 9e __o , "`...�, �:� � w.,, 9 �,o yes � • \ ue lab �ON ROAD 's• ay �`�' ett�E1j � SCANNED FRANK R. CARDARELLE Land surveyor, Inc. Land SuNoyc; 941-3031 6440 Flying cloud Drive Eden Prairie, MN 5534• QlAro,)zr t i i uric-� Survey For Steve Monson Book Page File fi.�nA 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: 361-0957 • Description: Parcel I: That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Carver County,Minnesota, described as lying Northeasterly of a line described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 353.03 feet Southerly of the Northeast corner of said Lot 2; thence North- westerly to a point on the Westerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 130.50 feet Southerly from the Northwest corner of said Lot 2 ��— and there terminating. Subject to a roadway easement over the Easterly 17 feet of said parcel adjacent to Audubon Road. Subject to a drainage and utility easement over the Southerly and South- Scale: 1"=60' westerly 6 feet adjacent to the Southwesterly line of said parcel. • Denotes Iron Mon.Found Proposed Retaining Walls 906.0 This plan, specification or report was Prop.60' Driveoor @10% rade prepared by me or under my direct super- Prop.60 Drive @10% Grade 912.0 Ret.Walls: vision, and that I am a duly Registered er Wall 910.0 Prop. Land Surveyor i'n the State of Minnesota. Low 6 ' Hi her Wall 916.0 Prop. Signed this 2 day of S ptember, 2004. `JI r SRO oN 9 Frahk K. Car arelle State Reg. License No. 6508 7 r- 61 U� CITY OF CfJA?4!i45 1�a SEP 0 3 2004 ENGINEERING DEPT. U1 ' n ' (DD H 7 H• p, I��l� H 0 co (D II P 0 CrI b 4 /a Poo) CD I p 1 dw * H �. hop. • ��+ , Odra °Sed' ,6. 6..r »r C 9e p W -" " R zzz.a,: 00 / o y SJ' 1 78o ra ON 804D \ � o �OcjC aY �Sejnef? � SCANNED FRANK R. CARDARELLE Land surveyor, Inc. Land SurvayL 941-3031 6440 Flying cloud Drive Eden Prairie, MN 5534- IVITOrtifiratc Of Ours Survey For Steve Monson Book Page File fisog 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: 361-0957 Description: Parcel I: That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Carver County, Minnesota, described as lying Northeasterly of a line described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 353.03 feet Southerly of the Northeast corner of said Lot 2; thence North- westerly to a point on the Westerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 130.50 feet Southerly from the Northwest corner of said Lot 2 and there terminating. Subject to a roadway easement over the Easterly 17 feet of said parcel adjacent to Audubon Road. Subject to a drainage and utility easement over the Southerly and South- westerly 6 feet adjacent to the Southwesterly line of said parcel. This plan, specification prepared by me or under vision, and that I am a Land Surveyor to e Sta Signed this 2nd/day/_o" or report was my direct super - duly Registered epof Minnesota. ember, 2004. 0 Scale: 1"=60' ® Denotes Iron Mon.Found . � Proposed Retaining Walls • Prop.Gar.Floor Elev. 906.0 Prop.60' Drive @10% Grade 912.0 Ret .WaIIs: Lower Wall 910.0 Prop. Higher Wall 916.0 Prop. -Z / ! ue � &a VVL_& zc�sejne"? t E • SCANNED 0 0 Scale: 1"=100' 11 ourvev Survey For st2ye Monson " 8850 Audubon Road CITY OF CHANHASSEN Chanhassen, MN 55317 MEWED Phone: 361-0957 APR 1 u 2000 G„pcJ�z. IV ED gl4•y ENGINEERING DEPT. 9i8 y TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY & JUNti '! 2004 y AERIAL SURVEY FROK p� pel CITY OF CHANHASSEN SEE E fa Qa ALTEX 41 tTE Sw)rte AW 4115 #13140V BY-sw644VA14b SEPTIC, yn3Poope4 6 ..... 465.24' side ya,x1 �9 i '�'�,. . ♦_ S 87'48'56 z. . . -� 98.L•j!r WWI h' F Area for �• " 's iieas go fi Drain Fiel) E / if needed 4I" 3° y POO rya / �° � ► 1 M a Al .PARCEL I r Qv 2.5 Cres Z k� Q aro r a o `°r �a, '0.41 h �o��o 3� o' �� OA 9s . Rv h o 3 r (V SE1: W .7N ,o a , ♦ / yi lk /�/��e i \ PARCEL II i9 50.00 a W 5'� oA \ \2.5 Acres! Q 5 \ / S 7x'51 S ?68 �p Drainage & 01°40'35 Utility Easement 8' f ♦�.�. R = 5781.99' T = 84.59' S6,S32py 't L = 169.18' 4 / APP_ R_ VD w� BY: DEPT: Z DATE: q BY: DEPT1 DATE: N BY: SCANNED m1c. / %o',/mJ 4 Scale: 1"=100' SCAXNW 10 m 4 d �-N ti m 0 Survey For Steve Monson 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: 361-0957 Guy/. 3 g/q 1 w_ DZ s SEE AlOrE F0 ! atu ALTFC/t/W SErrit- EMEA 4113 gzo,z #/3/av B!� S4.IEEDLIJ�b SEiT/G / 9j1'3 ) P&& / 7-6 Da Al pb° wn,wm l0 de a uiKd 6! . 465.24' � y Mq S 87°48'5& 98.F1 h' Are or a f ,s ileef in Drain Fiel4 s PARCEL I / k/ / Q / rye > V 2.5 cres / w~ 0 3v /p N p %. o E, 9S'.. 4 y� jt ry �n a eT ti �� ✓� /� c��c\JS \ \ PARCEL II X2.5 Acres0. Q Drainage & Bg°57'78„ �'• �` O = 01°40'35 Utility Easement f .1: �.�. R = 5781.99' �' T = 84.59' APPROVED Sse 2 t L = 169.18' s3 °L 4 ft BY: �'• DATE: @Y: q uEPI: DAIS: p uY' • (P Z9 �/ DAiE: °j r0 ry CITY OF CHANHASSEN m E6,-gWF-O! APR 1 ' 2000 ENGINEERING DEPT. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY & AERIAL SURVEY FROM CITY OF CHANHASSEN ,gut ' Survey For Steve Monson 8850 Audubon Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: 361-0957 v 485.24' S 87°48'58" E'' Scale: 1"=100' o r - - __ _ as,c• p yF I Area for e w ' •YID' .' Drain Field / Aeea so ~,� w /I• Jc�0. if needed y m� c f Q4 PARCEL 2.5 cres(40 r0 CO Iry tr v a 50.0e :N r�e \\ PARCEL II 02 / y� 77°51 5A W \o' or \2.5 Acres• ,m Draina S 69° 4 / TitnageSI•18„ F \ \\ \�\ / 0 = 01040'35 R = 5781.99' �1 T = 84.59' 2pa L = 169.18' J I A Of fi 'w y iWµED ,y Description: Parcel I: That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Carver County,Minnesota, described as lying Northeasterly of a line described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 353.03 feet Southerly of the Northeast corner of said Lot 2; thence North- westerly to a point on the Westerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 130.50 feet Southerly from the Northwest corner of said Lot 2 and there terminating. Subject to a roadway easement over the Easterly 17 feet of said parcel adjacent to Audubon Road. Subject to a drainage and utility easement over the Southerly and South- westerly 6 feet adjacent to the Southwesterly line of said parcel. Parcel II: Lot 2, Block 1, Sun Ridge, except that part lying Northeasterly of a line described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 353.03 feet Southerly of the North- east corner of said Lot 2; thence Northwesterly to a point on the Westerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 130.50 feet Southerly from the Northwest corner of said Lot 2 and there terminating, together with: That part of Lot 1, Block.l,Sun Ridge Third Addition, Carver County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying Northerly, Northeasterly and Easterly of the following described line: Beginning at the most Easterly corner of said Lot 1, Block 1,Sun Ridge Third Addition; thence North 69 degrees 51 minutes 18 seconds West along the Northerly line of said Lot 1 a distance of 87.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 56 degrees 53 minutes 53 seconds East a distance of 89.20 feet to a point on the Northwesterly right-of-way line of Audubon Road, and said line there terminating said point of termination being 20.00 feet Southwesterly of the said most Easterly corner of said Lot 1, Block 1, Sun Ridge Third Addition, as measured along the said right-of-way line of Audubon Road. Subject to a roadway ease- ment over the Easterly 17 feet of said parcel adjacent to Audubon Road. Subject to a drainage and utility easement over the Northerly and Northeasterly 6 feet adjacent to the Northeasterly line of said parcel. This plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota. Signed -this day of sj7e� 1997. zf Frank R. Cardarelle S€atelReg. License NOTES: Area: Parcel I - 108.900 sq.ft. 2.5 acres Parcel II'- 108.936'sq.ft. 2.5 acres` Sewer drain`.field area approved by Jeff Swedlund.