Loading...
PC Minutes 10-2-07 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 2, 2007 Chairman McDonald called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mark Undestad, Dan Keefe, Kathleen Thomas and Jerry McDonald MEMBERS ABSENT: Debbie Larson, Kurt Papke and Kevin Dillon STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resource Specialist; Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; and Krista Torgerson, Natural Resources Technician PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS: Jerry & Janet Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive Debbie Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive PUBLIC HEARING: SCHERLE VARIANCE: REQUEST FOR AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE TO A SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE ADDITION ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-RESIDENTIAL (PUD-R) LOCATED AT 8541 FLAMINGO DRIVE, APPLICANT: DAVID & JULIE SCHERLE, PLANNING CASE NO. 07-22. Public Present: Name Address David & Julie Scherle 8541 Flamingo Drive Daniel Tan 8551 Flamingo Drive Robert Whims 8556 Flamingo Drive Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. McDonald: Mark, any questions? Undestad: Just one on the driveway. You said there was a hard surface issue and now that's been, with the shed, square footage and everything else is okay on there? Generous: Right. They removed the excess. There used to be an expansion on the driveway that was in there. There's some retaining walls and some other things that the property owner removed in the interim since when they were first notified that that was an issue and the present time. Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Undestad: The square footage of the shed area is, that can stay. That square footage is okay? Generous: I believe that was included in, I don't know. I had it. Yes, the shed was included in that. And it would comply. Undestad: Okay. McDonald: Okay. Thomas: Yeah, okay. Of the things that they removed in the interim, does that also include the shed that's in the back, or is that. Generous: No, that's still. Thomas: That's still there on the property. And then I saw in the paper where it said the city, we maybe could put it on the back side of the garage I believe is what I was reading. Is that really a viable space or? Generous: Not if you look at it, not immediately behind the garage. Thomas: Okay. Generous: Unfortunately the survey doesn't show all the improvements on the property. It's from the original building permit application and so if you look at the picture you can see there's a deck behind there. Thomas: Okay. Generous: But there is room in the rear yard that a structure could be incorporated. Thomas: Could be incorporated in back. Okay. That was my question. Thank you. McDonald: Dan. Keefe: The, this is a PUD. Is the setback in the rear 5 feet like it is in RSF? Just out of curiosity. Is it 5 in the back for accessory structures and then 10 on the sides and that's for RSF right? And that's what was applied in this particular PUD? Generous: Yes. Keefe: It is. So it's consistent with the. Generous: With the RSF. Keefe: With the RSF. Alright, so we don't have a conflict there. Okay. That's all I have. 2 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 McDonald: I don't have any questions at this time for staff. Is there someone here to present the applicant? Would you step up to the podium and state your name and address and just address the commissioners and tell us your side of all this. Dave Scherle: My name's Dave Scherle, 8541 Flamingo Drive. We think the location of the shed is the best place for it and we're hoping to get the variance to keep it there. Angie, the planner, she was suggesting we put it behind the garage where it would fit there, but to drive our motorcycle back in that location we'd have to go over grass and we can't, it just, the motorcycle weighs over 800 pounds and it, it'd be too much, too dangerous. You'd have to drive over grass or dirt and you could damage the motorcycle or injure the rider, and the shed itself will have the same siding as the house has and the roof will have the same kind of shingles as the house has and the soffits and the eaves will have the same color as the house too so it should fit right in with the house, but it won't be part of the garage. It will be right next to the garage. It won't be actually you know connected. But it's right next to the, to the garage. We'd have to remove the sidewalk that the shed is on right now to meet the requirements of the hard cover so that's why we'd have to be driving on grass to get the motorcycle back there. So that's the main reason why we need it where it's at right now. That's it. McDonald: Okay. Mark. Undestad: Yeah, just one, well actually a couple questions here. The foundation, is it a below grade foundation or is it just the sidewalk and you're building. Dave Scherle: Just the sidewalk. Kind of a floating slab. Undestad: Okay. So it will move in the wintertime when… Dave Scherle: Yeah. There could be some movement with it, yeah. Undestad: And looking at how this sits on there, I realize where you're at in the stages right now when it's out there. Did you look and see, can it be just pushed back along the garage a little more to get it out of that easement area? Dave Scherle: Well, I looked at that and I, there isn't, you know I was actually thinking about doing that because I was going to try getting some rollers underneath to move it back farther but it would still be in that easement. Otherwise yeah, that is a really good idea. Yeah there is, it still would be in the easement. Undestad: And that sidewalk then that you've got already poured in there, you can maneuver your motorcycle around the front of the garage to get into that? Dave Scherle: It will be a little tight but I think I'll be able to do it. McDonald: Okay. 3 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Dave Scherle: Might have to put in a, you know I'm a little, I've got probably a little bit of play with the hard cover where I could put in some concrete blocks in that corner to help make it a little bit easier. Undestad: It looked a little tight for that. Dave Scherle: Yeah. Yeah, it is pretty tight so that, I might have to do that but there is some easement, I've got I don't know how many feet but I've got a few square feet. I could just get that in there. Because I would like to make it easy as I could to get in and out. Undestad: How far back, if you could move it back, do you know, did anybody, how far back would it have to go before it's outside of the easement area. Do you know? Dave Scherle: I'm not sure. Undestad: 15, 20 feet. Aanenson: I'd say about 20, yeah. Generous: Probably a little bit farther. Dave Scherle: Because the long property line is not too far from the retaining wall so, but it does, you know it does have a few feet but you know for that kind of feet, you'd have to go back probably by the oh, the deck back there I think probably to get to that far. Undestad: Would it have to be that big for the motorcycle? Dave Scherle: Does what? Undestad: Does it have to be that big? Dave Scherle: No, it doesn't have to be quite that big but you'd still would have to move it so far back. I don't know, let's see the motorcycle's 103 inches long I think. It's pretty long. But yeah, it wouldn't have to be quite that big. You could make it smaller but if that's what it would take to get it, we could do that too. I mean it's able to take it down and move it. I mean if we have to, we'll take it down and that's all that's to it too. If we don't get the variance so. Undestad: That's all for me. McDonald: Kathleen. Thomas: So I want to know what kind of bike it is. Dave Scherle: It's a Gold Wing. Thomas: Gold Wing? 4 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Dave Scherle: Yeah. Thomas: Okay. We have a motorcycle too and I, so I was just curious. Then are you, is it going to be heated? Is it just going to be like a garage? Dave Scherle: Just a garage. Thomas: Just like a garage. Dave Scherle: Yeah. Not heated. Thomas: Not heated. You'll have to go start it and, okay. Alright, I'm good. Keefe: Just to probably state the obvious, were you aware that a permit was required for doing that? Dave Scherle: I didn't think for 120 feet or less you needed a permit for it. That was what I have heard before and I thought that was the case for this. Keefe: Okay, that's it. McDonald: Okay. Where do you currently store your motorcycle? Keefe: It's in the garage with some lumber and stuff right now and the car is outside right now. McDonald: Okay. And how long have you been doing that? Is it just kind of a seasonal thing in the winter you'll put the motorcycle away? Keefe: Well right now, see our old motorcycle that we owned before, we just got this July. I could fit in the garage and it was okay. Plus it was easier. It was a smaller motorcycle. I could drive it on the grass and get it to the back shed to store. But in the summer I could, yeah or summer I could get it off the side so I could get the car in and out and then my back was bothering me with that motorcycle so we bought this other motorcycle to you know help out on the back and it really has because there's not much vibration on a Gold Wing. McDonald: Okay. And then on the shed itself, how wide does it really need to be because it looks as though, could you narrow things up? Bring it in closer to the garage? Keefe: See it's really pushing it for even a 4, I've got like a 4 1/2 foot garage door that I can just get in there. That's the best I could and let's see what is it? 3 1/2 feet wide I think from mirror to mirror so there's not a lot, even with that 4 1/2 foot garage door for you know, you have a little bit on each side but you want something on each side of the motorcycle to get in there so you don't hit. Hit the door. 5 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 McDonald: Okay. And the retaining wall that's shown in that photograph, is that something that was built as a part of putting the shed up, or was that already existing? Dave Scherle: That was already existing and the only thing that's left of that is the retaining wall the length of the shed. It's been removed in front of it. Well it actually goes a little bit in front of the shed. It goes probably approximately 3 or 4 feet. I can't remember exactly. There's an apron. It comes out to that. Actually it shows on the picture here. That it comes out. The retaining wall comes out to there. So yeah, so the retaining wall starts there and goes all the way to the back of the shed right now. The rest has been removed because of the hard cover. McDonald: Okay. And okay currently you've got a patio on the back side so that's why you're saying that the shed actually couldn't be moved around to the back then? Dave Scherle: Well, if we did move it around to the back, you'd have a hard time getting the motorcycle to it because I'd have to be going on grass with it and you should really be on hard surface to be moving that motorcycle around. Because it could easily, you could easily dump it. I haven't dumped it yet and I hope I never do. It's a lot of weight to pick up. McDonald: 800 pounds, that's going to be kind of hard. Dave Scherle: Yeah. McDonald: Well I guess I don't have any more questions at this point. Undestad: Just one more. Dave Scherle: Okay, sure. Undestad: The shed, is the primary use, is it for the winter storage of the bike or is it just for all time? Dave Scherle: It will be all the time is what we were planning on using it for. McDonald: Okay. Well we thank you for coming up and addressing us then. Dave Scherle: Thank you. McDonald: Okay. At this time then I would open up the floor for public comment on this issue and if anyone wanted to come up and make comment, please do so. When you get to the podium, if you will state your name and address and address your comments to the commission. Robert Whims: Hi, I'm Robert Whims. I live right across the street from Dave. 8556 Flamingo Drive and I just wanted to say the garage, it looks good so I hope you give it to him. McDonald: Okay, thank you. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Daniel Tan: I'm Daniel Tan, 8551 Flamingo Drive. Just a neighbor to the side. You know aesthetically the garage looks good and I think you guys, I think…I think you guys should let it be there. Thank you. McDonald: Okay, thank you. Does anyone else wish to come up before the commission? Okay well at that point then I guess I will close the public meeting portion of this and I'll bring it back up for the commissioners for open discussion then. Why don't we start down here with Dan. Keefe: Yeah, I've got just sort of two thoughts on it. One is you know, if we allow this to go in on this side and then say the next door neighbor or you know that's adjacent to him, you know decides they want to do that and because it's on this we sort of, maybe are obligated to do that. Then you end up with a pretty small space inbetween the houses. Do we end up with a potential you know issue with fire and being able to get emergency vehicles or so far, you know. I think in part the purpose for the setbacks is to allow you know space for, space between the houses both for maybe emergency vehicles and then also just for aesthetic reasons, so kind of torn on that issue. I don't know if you guys have any thoughts on that. The side setbacks. McDonald: That's kind of what I'm kind of torn between too. Those things are put in there for the reason that you state. It's very, I mean we face this same problem just about everything that comes before us. You know developers come in, sell us on a house. It meets the setbacks and they go right to the limit and then we end up with the homeowner trying to do something and we tell them they can't. But the setbacks are there for a reason and you know we are very consistent with that so yeah, I understand. I'm kind of torn on this myself. Kathleen. Thomas: I'm the same issue. I can totally understand setbacks, if we grant them like this it creates like a slippery slope of who else will want the same type of thing, but I understand what the gentleman is saying about the shed. It being, it's really I'm quite torn just because I see it, both sides so. McDonald: Mark. Undestad: Well you know primarily it's drainage in there too. Everything goes from the back of that lot out to the street to the front of that lot. You know if we start pushing those setbacks and drainage in there, you know you've got a happy now. I'm sure he wants to keep him that way too instead of flooding out his basement in there when the heavy rains come in but again, nobody likes to see something that's already built and have to start moving things around but you know, that's again, that's why we have the setbacks and the easements and basically the no build… McDonald: Yeah, I guess the thing I'm kind of torn between is that you know emotionally you're probably one of the nicer guys to come up before us and ask for this. Most everybody else is very much in our face about why we ought to do this. The setbacks are there for a reason. The drainage is very important. We have a lot of problems within the city as far as drainage. Every time a developer comes in, that's part of the design process that we go through with the developer to say you've got to do this as far as drainage and they put this stuff in. What you're asking us to do is similar to two other applications that came in before us and I know that in one case we asked a guy to take out a gazebo because he was on easement and drainage and it was 7 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 just going to create a big problem. It was a beautiful structure. He had a lot more money into it by the time he got to us than you know what you've got at this point but we have to enforce the rules and they're there for a reason. One thing staff does, we study these things very hard to give homeowners maximum use of their property without interfering with the rights of others. I understand, and again we all feel kind of your pain about this. Yeah, 800 pound motorcycle, you've got to put it someplace. Gold Wing's a beautiful bike and everything but the problem that we run into is that we can't base decisions based upon that. I just don't believe we can do that or anyone can come in here and again give us a good story and reasons why, we've had to turn down people because of physical handicaps and everything and that's the hard part about this job but I guess you know my leaning is, yeah I would feel for you and everything. You've got a good reason I guess for building the shed to begin with. I appreciate your civility about coming up here and the way you've approached this and stuff but I'm probably going to have to lean on the side of where the rules are at. I guess. Undestad: Can I add one thing though? Again I mean you can go to the council on that but these types of structures too when they're built without foundations on there, and again being in the area that it's in with the drainage and that, there's potential for a lot of movement. You know hinging off your house. You can be kind of faced with problems quite a while as that thing constantly goes up and down. You know it will pull away from your house. Go back to your house. Kind of the reasons too why you know a lot of the stuff, sheds like this should be put on something a little more stable foundation wise. McDonald: Any further comments? Then I guess at this time we're ready to accept a recommendation. Who'd like to. Undestad: I'll get it here. Recommend the Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-22 for a 7 foot 3 inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 foot side yard setback for the th construction of a shed on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5 Addition based on the Findings of Fact in the staff report. The Planning Commission further directs that number 1, the applicant must move the shed. Comply with zoning ordinance. And the applicant must revegetate all removed hard surface as with grass seed or sod. Keefe: Second. McDonald: Okay. Undestad moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission denies Planning Case #07- 22 for a 7 foot 3 inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 foot side yard th setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5 Addition, based on the Findings of Fact in the staff report. The Planning Commission further directs that: 1. The applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re-vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod. 8 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 All voted in favor, except Thomas who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 1. McDonald: Okay, motion passes 3 to 1. What I would suggest is you talk with the city staff on this. You have a right to appeal this up to the City Council. The minutes of this particular hearing will go into the packet for the City Council. You may be able to reach a compromise with staff that would work within the ordinance and everything and still accommodate what you want. I think you'll find them very accommodating and try to help give you some you know good ideas as to what to do. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: PARKS & OPEN SPACE, NATURAL RESOURCES ELEMENTS. Public Present: Name Address Tim Erhart 9611 Meadowlark Lane Glenn Stolar Park and Rec Commission Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mr. Chair, members of the Planning Commission. As you know the last year we spent a lot of time going through the evolution of the comprehensive plan, which I'm happy to announce is out and out for press. It did go out last Friday for jurisdictional review. It is required for 6 month open hearing date, so that time is starting right now. I also wanted to let you know, you do have a hard copy, the entire hard copy in front of you. Just for everybody else, for their knowledge and information, the entire comprehensive plan draft is on the city's web site, so if anybody's interested in reading a particular chapter, I hope you read all the chapters, they can go online and do that. The goal of the public hearing process to get input from our residents to see if we're moving in the right direction and address their concerns. Not only our residents but the jurisdictions that it goes out to, includes the school districts, the watershed districts, DNR, just to name a few. So we're hoping to get positive input, or informative input that we can respond to as we move forward in the process. So as we set up this process we're going to take a couple chapters at a time for you to hold the public hearing and to gather that input and at the end of that process, as we break it down, we'll move into January where we respond in writing to the comments that are received and the staff that it's more appropriately addressed to will also respond so actually you'll have that collection of responses. So whether it goes to engineering or parks and rec or planning, we'll respond to those comments and you can see what those are. Then ultimately your comments will be forwarded up to the City Council for their review and then after we have the 6 month jurisdiction review, it goes up to the Met Council who gets another 60 days to review. So we're looking probably in sometime the first part of July for final adoption. So I just wanted everybody to know there's plenty of time to get comments into the city. If you want to call and speak to the person that would be most appropriate to talk to, whether it's engineering, city forester, the planning department to talk to and get your questions answered. We hope people take the time to review that. So for tonight the first two chapters that we'll be looking at will be the natural resources which includes forestry, natural resources and water resources and then park and rec. The Environmental 9