Loading...
1993 09 13CHANHASSEN ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Willard Johnson, Carol Watson and Mark Senn STAFF PRESENT: Sharmin A1-Jaff, Planner I 15 FOOT FRONT YAI~D SETBACK VARIANCE AND A 5 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR ~ CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 220 FRONTIER COIJ-RT~ PETER AI-Jaff: You approved this variance a little over a year ago and the applicant had originally requested a variance to put a garage addition and thc Board approved a single side car with some storage added to the garage addition. This addition will not encroach any ~ onto the rear yard setback. It will maintain a 5 foot side yard setback and as far as the front yard goes, there is a 15 foot setback. The applicant couldn't proceed with the addition because, just as he was ready to build he found out that his house is sitting on a slab of concrete rather than a typical foundation. So they decided to wait and figure out the ramifications there are as he pro~ with this addition. He's been working very closely with Steve Kirchman, the Building Official and finally he's ready to go through with this addition. The only change that we have from what you originally approved, is this extension right here. What the Board had originally approved was, this is the existing house right here. So you're only adding this portion. That's the only...from the previous variance versus the variance the applicant is requesting today. Again, not encroaching any further onW any of the y~ setbacks and we are reco~ending approval with conditions outlined in the report. Thank yom Watson: Remember when we looked at this the first time. You wondered if it was on a slab and how that would, I remember that whole discussion. Peter Dahl: What I had done is dug down next to the house and determined that all it is is like a 4 to 6 inch slab under there. After talking to Strve, he said that I can build a garage if I put in 42 inch footings around the garage. However, the only reason is because the ground under my house is heated. It's very bizarre but they've put in duct work underaeath the house so he says the ground is not freezing under there. Otherwise, they could just put a slab on and it'd be very easy. It's not the case. So they... Johnson: Is that little square going to just be ~ an entryway or something? Board of Adjustments and Appeals - September 13, 1993 Peter Dahl: Well actually, let me just come over here for a minute. The area fight here is actually what, I'm going to redo this area so what I'll be doing is adding a little square area here...so I'll be taldng off what is already here and it's a small little garage. It's about 12 feet deep. There's a little... Watson: We have to waive this quite a bit. Johnson: I guess I have no problem with the a_ddition_ I'd like to ask the rest of the Board. Watson: Mark's the only one who hasn't seen thia before. Johnson: Mark, have you looked at it? Senn: Yes. One question. I did know about the letter areas when I took a buzz by it but, so I didn't look at it specifi~y but with the location of the other houses, how does it obstruct the sight lines7 AI-Jaff: In fact thc applicant is not exceeding thc limits of, assmning that he met the setbacks. He is at least 25 feet below what is pemfitted by ordinance as far as thc height goes. Senn: I don't recall any way that it would even impact it. Al-$aff: No. Senn: As far as the sight line goes. Watson: Well, he isn't going to be any closer now than he was before. Al-la/f: Correct Senn: That's what...me about the letter. Al-Jaff: He doesn't want anyone to build in front of him so that he would maintain a view of the lake. However, he doesn't have a lake lot. Senn: He can't see the lake? Watson: No. He's quite, he's a long ways away. Board of Adjustments and Appeals - September 13, 1993 Johnson: We discussed it the last 6mc. Watson: Yeah because this gentleman was here. Johnson: Yeah, no problem. Watson: Do you want a motion? Johnson: Yeah, I'll take a motion. Watson: Alright. I'll make a motion to, how do you want us to do this Sharmin? Since we've done it before. Did the variance run out? Do we approve a new variance? A1-Jaff: Or approve an extension. You can appr~e a new variance. Watson: Can we just do it that way? Watson: Alrighc I'll make a motion to approve Variance Request #91-9, whoops, for a 18 foot front, 20 foot rear and 15 foot side yard setbacks for construction of a garage, 220 Frontier Court, Peter Dahl... Now, what kind of, did we have any additions to that that you wanted to put on there? I don't see any recommendations. Senn: I'll second that. Johnson: Any more discussion? Watson moved, Senn seconded to approve Variance Request #91-9 for the construction of a garage on property zoned RSF and located at 220 Frontier Court. All voted in favor and the motion carried. A1-Jaff: We'll process everything but we just won't give you a permit until Friday. Watson: Good luck. I hope you get this going before, I mean the weather appears to be deteriorating quickly. Peter Dahl: Yes. It's going to get better though. Watson: Thank you. Board of Adjustments and Appeals - September 13, 1993 FRONT AND SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR TIlE REPL.4,CEMENT OF AN EXISTING GARAGE ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 7407 FRONTIER TRAIL~ BLAIR AND NANCY ENTENMANN. A1-Jaff: This is an existing garage. Two car garage. 24 x 20 feet. It is located, it's half a foot from the front property line at this point and 1.4 feet from the side pwpe~ ~ It backs up to a hill: The applicant, the garage is deteriorating and needs to be replaced. The applicant wishes to replace it with a 3 car garage and maintsin a I foot front yard setback and a 2 foot side yard setback. Now, and since they are ~ving an existing situation, but at the same time they are intensifying a use. A non-conforming use. They are at a fairly...the fight-of-way. Well, the fight-of-way begins at this point basically but from where the bituminous is, there is a 60 foot setback and we feel that if we realign Frontier, that there is enough room to widen the road and still be able to rnainmi~ a setback from the garage. It's the topography of this parcel that cream thc hardship. We are recommending approval of this variance with the conditions outlined in the report. Thank you. Johnson: Do you wish to speak sir? Blair Entenmann: Well, it's really like more of a large two car garage rather than a 3 car garage because we have 3 cars but 1 we don't drive in thc winter so 1, so it's only a 2 car stall looking garage but it's long enough to put one car against the back wall far 6 months of the year. And then just jock~ the cars around twice year. Johnson: It's going to occupy the existing area anyway? Blair Entenmarm: Yes. Johnson: You aren't really intens~g the area are you? Blair Ent~nmann: Well we're going from 24 x 20 feet to 24 x 28 feet. So we're making it a little longer. Johnson: Longer. Where you drive in. I see. Blair Entenmann: Yes. Johnson: But it won't be any closer to the street than the existing garage will? Blair Entenmann: No. Board of Adjustments and Appeals - September 13, 1993 A1-Jaff: Actually it would set it back further...and that's an hnpwvement. Senn: I'll move approval. Watson: I'll second it. Johnson: Any more discussion? Blair Entenmann: I have a question before you vote yes. In the staff report. Johnson: You'd better be careful here. Blair Bntenmann: I know. I'm going to be very careful In the staff report it talked about having a 1 hour fire wall on the two walls that are close to the lot lines and I'm sure there's good reason for that. But given that the neare.~ stmcuu~ are anywhere from 150 to 250 feet, I was wondering why I really had to go throu~ the added expense of making those two walls fa~e walls since there are no stmcttues anywhere near. Watson: According to this report it's UBC isn't it? AI-Jaff: Correct. We have no. Watson: No control over it. According to Steve Kirchman's report in here, Kirchman's report, that is the Uniform Building Code. State of Minnesota. Blair Entenmann: Oh okay. So I have to do it anyway. Watson: Yeah. Blair Entenmann: Okay. Well I just thought I'd ask. Senn: We can't supersede it is the problem. Blair Entenmann: It's you know, it will be more expensive to do that. Johnson: We can make it stricter but. Blair Entenmann: I just had that as a quick question. Watson: So we want to be sure we get those reco~tions with our motion. Board of Adjustments and Appeals - September 13, 1993 ~ohnson: Is that your motion, the recommendation of. Senn: With the one recommendation. Watson: There's three. Senn: I only had one. Watson: I had three. Senn: I was looking at Kirchman's report. Oh okay, so there's actually four. Okay, 2 entails Kirchrnan's. Okay, I've got it. 1, 2, 3. Yep. Senn moved, Watson seconded to approve the front and side yard variance for the replacement of an existing garage on property zoned RSF and located at 7407 Frontier Trail subject to the 3 conditions in the staff report. AH voted in favor and the motion carried. A LAKESHORE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR TI:IF. CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 9243 LAKE IIILEY BOULEVARD~ JOY TANNER SMITH. Al-Jaff: This is the existing house. The applicant is proposing to add a storage space as well as some living space. This is the shed. We'll have a front yard setback of 22 feet and a side yard setback of 10 ~ So there isn't a front yard setback, I = a side yard setback variance. However, because they are wanting to maintain that front yard setback, they are going to need a front yard variance as well as a lakeshore setback variance. They will have a setback of 69 feet from the edge of the lake. The OHW of the lake. This is a fairly old neighborhood. We surveyed the area within 500 feet. There are some houses that have a setback of 35 feet which the Board had granted variances for. This addition is going to be reasonable. The applicant could and do have the option to add on a second floor and not in~ any of those setbacks. However, they are seniors and for mobility sake, they In--er w stay on one level. We are recommending approval of this variallce with conditiolls outlined in the report. Thank you. Senn: Which side did the letter come from7 A1-Jaff: It's 3. Board of Adjusunents and Appeals - September 13, 1993 Senn: Oh down. Watson: It's not in direct Senn: Okay. Because they're not even going as far out as the neighbors existing. Al-Jaff: No. No, there are definitely quite a few houses that are closer. Senn: Oh okay. So this one you're not going really any closer in either direction7 Al-$aff: No. Senn: You're meeting the side ys~ setback as it is. Johnson: Mr. or Mrs. Tanner, do you wish to say something? Wish to discuss it? Joy Tanner Smith: Do you need me here or is this fine? ...af~ looking over the plan and so forth, we had decided to move the front addition over to extend the existing living part out rather than, it would not have any affect on the variance on the lake for a setback....egress from the existing bedroom. We're cutting ourselves off. Al-Jaff: Can you repeat that Joy? Joy Tanner Smith: Shall I show you? Al-$aff: Yes please. Joy Tanner Smith: I'll show you here. I don't know if I can read this backwards but I can point up here? AI-Jaff: Sure. Joy Tanner Smith: Okay. This will be storage and this was going to be additional living space. What we find was a better plan in talking to an architect who's drawing up for us is to move this whole business this way. Al-Jarl: And eliminate the deck altogether? Joy Tanner Smith: Ah no. Well, I have patio here. We might put a small back here. This is concrete patio behind the garage. On this end. This would save the windows in the Board of Adjustments and Appeals - September 13, 1993 existing master bedroom so we would have outside. Al-Jaff: So you're coming straight down like this or? Joy Tanner Smith: So. Yeah. Al-Jaff: This is your house fight now. This is where your house is. Joy Tanner Smith: Okay so with the new, the swrage space would remain the same. 7 feet x 24. Then the outside wall would be there and out here. A1-Jaff: Okay. And then §o all the way down. Joy Tanner Smith: Well I don't know. Yes, all the way down. AI-Jaff: To the edge of the deck? Okay. Joy Tanner Smith: Same dimensions. Watson: But the same size room but it's just moved down? Joy Tanner Smith: Yeah. Watson: It's exactly the same size mom? Joy Tanner Smith: Exactly the same as what we were proposing. Watson: Okay. Joy Tanner Smith: This would just be pn~shin§ out the wall, the existing living room. It would be according to the architect who's woridng on our plan, it would be a less cosily way to do it also. A1-Jaff: So it really doesn't change any of the setbacks? Joy Tanner Smith: Actually we would be farther away from the lake too as... Watson: You're right. Yeah, because the lakeshore angles there. Johnson: So the corner, the new room is about the same as your existing house now, Board of Adjustments and Appeals - Sepmuber 13, 1993 roughly? More or less. You're shifting this over to cxmae out. I unders~ Are you here on a variance tonight? ...okay, thank you. Senn: I'll move approval with conditions 1 and 2 attached but I'd also like to add 3. That we get the proper set of plans...so we have them. Watson: Sharmin. Oh, I'll second it. As for a deck bring built, we either need to know that or there isn't going to be a deck. I ~ she talks about putting a deck off that one side now that would be by the storage area. Off that one end. That's not in here so that would require a separate variance ff they want that deck Joy Tanner Smith: We would have to apply for that. Watson: Yeah, you would have to apply for that and it would be...or direct the deck at this point. Senn: Shannin, put that back up. As I was understanding thh. If the deck comes down and go over here so if you're going to put the deck inside of this area, you're okay. If you're going to put the deck outside of this area, then we need to know that or you have to re-apply. Because the deck is treated the same way as a stmcV, u-e. Joy Tanner Smith: That's true. Senn: Okay. So what we're saying is, based on the a~rov~ here, it's conditioned upon a set of plans. They're going to show this addition and this addifion/reeo~on really. And as long as the deck fails in that area, then you don't need anything more. If the deck's going to be outside of that area, then you have to come back in and go ti~ough the whole process. Watson: So if they could have filled in that comer down there by that new stm'age area with the decL we've got to know that. Joy Tanner Smith: We really need a deck there. Senn: I'm going to go back to my understanding again. Okay, your current house ends here right? This is seen as a storage area so I assume your master bedroom is here? Joy Tanner Smith: Right. Senn: Okay so if you're coming off yom' master bedroom with a deck, you're falling within this area. See what I'm saying? Board of Adjustments and Appeals - September 13, 1993 Mr. Smith: There wouldn't be an entrance onto the deck from the master bedroom. Watson: No, because the master bedroom's directly behind the addition. Senn: No. But the same point I'm trying to make here, unless you're going to put a deck outside the storage area, you're okay. Okay? See what I'm saying? Because you're already, with this configuration you're covering the area outside your master bedroom. But you are not covering the area outside your storage area. Joy Tanner Smith: Yeah, I'm extending it down towards the garage. Right. Senn: Right, but that's covered he~. Johnson: Your new addition isn't going to go any farther than the existing deck in front of the garage. Joy Tanner Smith: No. Not on that. Senn: So then it seems to me they're okay. Watson: Yeah, I guess so. Senn: But again, I think it's real key that you get. Johnson: Plans showing it. Scnn: Plans showing that. Watson: So we can see something that tells us exactly. Senn: Keep that so you know and that's what we're approving basically. Watson: And they should, when they bring those plans, make sure that anything that's going to be included in this project be on those plans. Senn: And within that area. Watson: And within that area or we have to you know, could just prolong the process. Johnson: We're using the existing area only we're shifting, still filling in with the deck- 10 Board of Adjustments and Appeals - Septeml~ 13, 1993 A1-Jaff: Why don't we approve it and if there is an ameadment, I'll bring it back before you next mee~ng. Watson: Okay. If the plans should include any. Johnson: Alright. Do you want to discuss it anymore? Watson: No. That was my only que~on. Senn moved, Watson seconded to approve a lakeshore setback variance for the construction of an addition on property zoned RSF and located at 9243 Lake Riley Boulevard for Joy Tanner Snfith, subject to the two conditions in the staff report plus a third condition stating that the applicant submit an accurate plan. AH voted in favor and the motion carried. Watson: I make a motion to close the public hearing. Johnson: Oh, I'll second that. Any more discussion7 Watson moved, Johnson seconded to close the public hearing~ AH voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was dosed. Watson: We were supposed to get some material on, and how is it that it slipped my mind. Remember? They were going to look, they were going to talk w, Kate told us that she would get us that information at our next meeting and it's not included in here. Something Kate was going to get for us. Senn: Based on last meeting? Watson: At the last meeting there was a discussion of something that she was going to look into and she was going to get the information. She had to go back and talk to someone. I don't know if it was building or who it was. Do you remember this at all? Johnson: No. I missed it. I remember you asking for something. There was supposed to be something brought up but I'll think of it when I get down the road here. Watson: Yeah I know it. I thought of it earlier and now I can't. Senn: Read thc Minute, and sec if there's anything. 11 Board of Adjustments and Appeals - Sepl~nber 13, 1993 Watson: Oh. We were going to discuss about handicap ramps and slructures and that type. A1-Jaff: And how far it should be set back from a property line? Watson: Isn't that funny, I can't remember. Johnson: Was it definitions on ramps as a part of the slmcmm? Watson: I don't remember. Senn: Oh, that was close. What it was was chan~ng the definition of decks so they weren't treated the same way as stmcuires because what we were talking about was with the deck area, you really weren't. Watson: The water couldn't... Senn: ...drain property under a deck is the same _thing as a yard so we were saying we should look at treating a deck at least as far as how the ratio is differently than stmcttu~. Because when it rains it just goes... Watson: So it's even pan of the hard surface coverage? Senn: It's not part of what we consider to be hard surface coverage. So what we did was ask her to look at that and look at revising that definition in the ordinance so it's not hard surface coverage unless it's enclosed. Or covered. Watson: I make a motion we adjourn. Oh wait a minute. We need to approve these Minutes. APPROVAL O~ ~tJTES: Watson moved, Senn secon~e~ to approve t~e M'mutes of the Board of A~usUnents and Appeals m~ as presente~ All vote~ ~n tavor and the motion csrrie& watson move~, Senn secon~e~ to a~ourn tae ~g~ A~ vot~ ~n gavor an~ tt~e m~on carried. The meeting was ad~mrne~. SuUmiUed by Paul Krauss Planning Director 12