Findings of Fact and Action 12-2-08
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND ACTION
IN RE: Application of Mark Ambrosen and Ann Senn for a 3.7% hard surface coverage variance
from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage in the Single-Family Residential (RSF) District -
Planning Case No. 08-24.
On December 2,2008, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly
scheduled meeting to consider the application of Mark Ambrosen and Ann Senn for a 3.7% hard
surface coverage variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage to allow 1,038 square
feet of hard surfaces at 3830 Maple Shores Drive, located in the Single Family Residential District
(RSF) on Lot 7, Block 1, Maple Ridge Addition. The Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on the proposed variance that was preceded by published and mailed notice. The
Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Single Family Residential (RSF).
2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential-Low Density (1.2 - 4 units per
acre ).
3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 7, Block 1, Maple Ridge Addition.
4. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not
grant a variance unless they find the following facts:
a. 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 this chapter does not cause an undue hardship. The
applicant currently has reasonable use of the property including a single-family home and a
three-car garage and a turnabout in the over 130-foot long drive. The applicant showed the
removal of 1,039 square feet of existing impervious surfaces, including the removal of the
turnabout (725 square feet), in order to obtain a building permit to construct 848 square feet
of home improvements on the site while maintaining 24.9% hard surface coverage. This
demonstrates that the applicant can achieve their goals of constructing the additions and
comply with City Code. Therefore, the hard surface coverage variance request is a self-
created hardship.
1
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
within the Single-Family Residential District. All properties within the RSF district are
limited by the 25% maximum hard surface coverage. In the past there has been erosion
problems in the bluff located on the south side of the property. Retaining walls have been
constructed on the site to mitigate those erosion issues; however, increasing the hard surface
coverage on the site will increase the runoff and may cause additional erosion issues.
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 intent of the request is not based on the desire to increase the value of the
home. The property owner's intent is to increase the livable area of the home in addition to
the existing hard surface coverage on the site. The applicant has demonstrated that additions
can be constructed and the site can be brought into compliance with the 25% maximum hard
surface limitation as outlined in the City Code.
d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship.
Finding: The applicant has reasonable use of the property, as a single-family home and a
three-car garage are currently located on the site. The applicant has demonstrated that 1,039
square feet of hard surface coverage can be removed to meet the 25% hard surface coverage
limitation in the RSF district in order to construct 848 square feet of improvements. As part
of the building permit, the applicant included removal of the turnabout in the driveway (725
square feet). Prior to issuing a building permit for the improvements and processing the
variance request, staff advised the applicant of staff's interpretation and recommendation for
the denial of the request. This request is a self-created hardship.
e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located.
Finding: The granting of a variance may be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. The
increase in the amount of hard surface coverage on the site will increase the runoff from the
site and may cause additional erosion which may run into Lake Minnewashta.
f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger
of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values
within the neighborhood.
Finding: The proposed home will not impair an adequate supply of light or air to the
adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the
danger of fire or endanger the public safety or diminish property values within the
neighborhood.
2
5. The planning report #08-24, dated December 2,2008, prepared by Angie Auseth, et aI, is
incorporated herein.
ACTION
"The Planning Commission denies Planning Case #08-24 for a 3.7% hard surface
coverage variance from the 25% maximum hard surface coverage to allow 1,038 square feet of
hard surfaces on Lot 7, Block 1, Maple Ridge Addition, based on these findings of fact."
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 2nd day of December, 2008.
CHANHASSEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Its Chair
g:\plan\2008 planning cases\08-24 ambrosen-senn variance\12-2-08 findings of fact.doc
3