Loading...
1997 06 17~HANHASSEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPPEALS REGULAR MEETING ~"UNE 17, 1997 (~hairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. YIEMBERS PRESENT: Willard Johnson, Carol Watson and Steve Berquist ~rAFF PRESENT: Sharmin A1-Jaff, Planner II and Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner I A REQUEST FOR AN 18 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 30 FOOT FRONT YARD ~ETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A POOL, ROBERT AND LAURA EVANS, ,2~31 DEERFOOT TRAIL Cynthia Kirchoff presented the staff report. Robert Evans questioned why the yard abutting Lake Riley Boulevard is a front yard rather than a rear yard because it is used as a back yard. He stated that several variances have been granted on Lake Riley Boulevard. Mr. Evans indicated that the pool will be engineered, the landscaping will ~ professionally done and that the project will exceed City Code requirements. He also stated that he would like to construct a pool so that his daughter will have a safe place to play. As to measurements of setbacks, he indicated that through his experience in the asphalt business, the setback is measured from the center of the road. Steve Berquist asked why the property has two front yards. He asked if the original plat showed t_he two front yards. A1-Jaff responded that the yard is consider'ed to be front yard' because it abuts a public street. Carol Watson stated the she has two front yards on her property because it is a comer lot. Berquist asked if pools can be constructed in the 30 foot rear yard setback. Sharmin A1-Jaff responded that based on square footage, accessory structures must maintain a certain setback in the rear yard. l~erquist questioned if the pool would be permitted in a rear yard and if the setbacks were s~ecified in the original plat. A1-Jaff confirmed that a pool could be constructed in the rear yard and that the 20 foot setback on Deerfoot Trail and 30 foot setback on Lake Riley Boulevard were shown on the plat. Evans stated he was told the only thing he can construct in this yard is a driveway. He q-~estioned why he can construct a driveway and not a pool. Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes June 17, 1997 Page 2 A1-Jaff indicated that the driveway may exceed the 25 percent hard surface coverage requirement. She said that the property already has access. Ms. A1-Jaff stated that a reasonable use does exist on the property and that a hardship must be proved for a variance to be granted. Berquist stated that staff interprets the Code. He commented that a variance is granted because a hardship is demonstrated. Evans stated that they would just like to improve their property. Berquist stated that he appreciates the fact that the applicant wants to improve the property, however, the original developer maximized the property and constrained their ability to construct a structure in that yard. He indicated that he would like the pool to work without approving a variance. Al~Jaff stated that staff had not reviewed the proposal that the applicant had presented at the meeting. She explained that the applicant had proposed a kidney-shaped pool. The staff report and the recommendation was based upon what ,,vas submitted to the City. Evans stated that they intended on constructing a rectangular-shaped pool, not a kidney-shaped. Kirchoff stated that she spoke with Becky at Valley Pools and that alternative locations were investigated, however, all would require a variance. Watson stated that the issue is the lot is less than 15,000 sq. ft. She stated that it is the responsibility of the owner to determine if a structure can be built prior to purchase. Berquist stated that he is unsure if he would be willing to grant a variance and that he is uncertain as to what the applicant is requesting. He stated that the 1% variance from the lot coverage requirement does not concern him, but the variance to the setback does. He commented that he understands the desire but would like to see a pool plan that is less extensive. Evans explained that they cannot use the back yard. Watson stated that staff did not receive the information that the applicant presented at the meeting and that staff is at a disadvantage since they have not seen the revised plan. She stated that she would like to table this application so that the applicant may work with staff regarding the size and the location of a pool. Berquist indicated that he does not want to create a false hope for the applicant by tabling this request. 13~ard of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes Ji,ne 17, 1997 Page 3 Evans stated that they only need one variance and that several properties along Lake Riley Boulevard have received variances. ¥~atson responded that some of the homes on Lake Riley Boulevard have received variances because the lots were unbuildable without it. She stated that not being able to build a single family home is a hardship. Berquist stated that many of the homes on Lake Riley Boulevard were constructed prior to the la_nd being platted and predate the ordinance. Evans asked why the City needs 30 feet of his property. B~rquist stated that the applicant should submit a proposal that may work. Watson asked if the City could waive the $75.00 fee. Berquist stated that the item should be tabled so that staff and the applicant may work on an akemative design. Watson moved, Berquist seconded the motion to table the variance application. The motion carried with a vote of 3 to 0. A.-Jaff informed the Board that the item needs to be voted on by September 30, 1997. jotmson asked if the $75.00 application fee could be waived for the applicant. A2-Jaff responded that she would investigate if the fee could be waived. AiREQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A DECK WITHIN THE 75 FOOT WETLAND SETBACK OF LOTUS LAKE, ROBERT AND LAURA EVANS, 331 DEERFOOT TRAIL A2-Jaffpresented the staff report. Roger Stech stated that the former owner was granted a variance in 1990, however, the deck was never constructed. Berquist asked if the deck will be 38 feet from the wetland. St2ch stated that the deck will not protrude past the boulder retaining wall. Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes June 17, 1997 Page 4 A1-Jaff commented that this home is closer than any of the neighbor's decks to the wetland. She stated that the ordinance has been amended to reduce the setback to 40 feet and that the wetland will not be impacted. Berquist asked how you can tell the wetland will not be affected. A1-Jaff responded that the setback depends on the type of wetland and that the buffer offers protection. Watson asked if the buffer was natural protection. Berquist asked if the variance would be for 2 feet from the current wetland setback. Johnson stated that this application requested a lesser variance than that in 1990. Berquist asked why the deck is not brought into compliance with the code. Stech stated that the deck size is minimum for a round table chairs. Berquist moved, Watson seconded the motion to approve the variance from the wetland with conditions outlined in the staff report. The motion carried with a vote of 3 to 0. Chairman Johnson closed the public hearing. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Watson moved, Johnson seconded to approve the minutes of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting dated May 20, 1997. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Berquist moved, Johnson seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. Prepared and Submitted by Cynthia Kirchoff Planner I