Application
Planning Case No. Oq - \1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVED
SEP 2 4 2009
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
CHANHASSEN PLANNlNG DEPT
PLEASE PRINT
Applicant Name and Address:
\ 18 M\'CV0 c~'f~(m('X\
q 5S -e Y'J O--I...~. "'ff~ ~ "cd ,
W 0.\ ~~cdd ~lSJ ~~~ I
Contact. C'~elS()~e \0(') ~'o-\ l.J \'f'f'. "We.o-.v er
Phone:90a. 8l.\q. -dXX)Fax~5a.' aHC\. ~1-'::,
Email: 0 CL"CO \-e.. -Too'heu co:?\ QS\fYLr . {Dm (5\
\
Q.VG fV\
Owner Name and Address:
}J r. <?o N fS . ('"" \-t'(\~\\
A\ \ \ ~i'\\eX\\l.'f'S+ '"Dr.
(' ,'0(u',:'(VkS,<3-.fT, I ~'N "2>~'-6o \
Contact:
Phone~'58. 51-3. 9-, \ --=t3 Fax:
Email: .T<XB.~\(.OS6{\tc;2pex-.fTcU.t.LC)(.f.
NOTE: Consultation with City staff is reauired prior to submittal, including review of development
plans
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Temporary Sales Permit
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC)
v-Variance (VAR) .JI~
Interim Use Permit (IUP)
Non-conforming Use Permit
Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)
Planned Unit Development*
Zoning Appeal
Rezoning
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Sign Permits
Sign Plan Review
'7' Notification Sign - $200
(City to install and remove)
Subdivision*
X ~for Filing Fee~orney Cost**
. UP/SPRlVA~AP/Metes & Bounds
- $450 Minor SUB
~~ 1$"iI'CA
TOTAL FEE $ ~"T..J-)
Site Plan Review (SPR)*
An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant
prior to the public hearing.
*Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8W' X 11"
reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a diaital COpy in TIFF-Group 4 (*.tif) format.
**Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract.
Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews.
NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for
each application.
WETLANDS PRESENT:
YES
~
NO
PRESENT ZONING: t\\Y\~\}. ~ m\\,-J\
REQUESTED ZONING: 01 'Pr
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATlON'~. ~ ~ rY> \, \
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION:
REASON FOR REQUEST: ~prt'~_, Y-re (\--\:-\0-(' hR d \_0 ~S--
FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW: Include number of existing employees:
and new employees:
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 Owner's 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 knowledge.
q l.3Jo~
Date
9/19/09
Date
G:\PLAN\Forms\Development Review Application.DOC
Rev. 1/08
September 11, 2009
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Blvd
Chanhassen, MN 55317
To Whom It May Concern:
We are requesting an impervious surface variance for 2111 Pinehurst Drive on
behalf of the homeowner. The constructed home (include driveway and sidewalk) is
currently over the impervious surface maximum by .8%. The size of the driveway
changed from what was originally proposed in the building permit survey. The
proposed driveway was inadequate to support the size and use of the garage for this
home. The driveway built today is wider, thus causing the slight increase in
impervious surface. In addition, this homeowner would like the ability to build a
small patio off the back of his home. If this patio is added, it would increase the total
impervious surface to 26.37%.
When reviewing this variance application, we respectfully request the staff and City
Council of Chanhassen to look at the big picture. This particular homesite backs up
to an open outlot, which could be added to the homesite's overall pervious surface
calculation. The homeowner has been living in this home with this larger driveway
and has acquired belongings based on this driveway. To force the homeowner to
change their driveway or way of living at this point would be hardship. With this
variance request, we are requesting to work with the City of Chanhassen to find a
reasonable solution to this minor error.
Below is our point by point narrative for the variance request.
a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause 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
and develop neighborhoods pre-existing standards exist. Variances that blend
with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet
this criteria.
The literal enforcement of the 25% impervious surface prevents this
homeowner from the quiet enjoyment of his home. The driveway that was ultimately
constructed was built to fit the type and intended use of the garage with this home.
This homeowner has purchase items based on this driveway and its intended use. To
take away the driveway would limit his use of his whole home.
The literal enforcement of the 25% impervious surface prevents this
homeowner from the quiet enjoyment of his backyard Prior to finding out that the
driveway was constructed larger than originally shown, we had always anticipated
on a 10' x 10' patio in the backyard of this home. It would be a hardship to take
away something based on the driveway error.
545 Indian Mound E., Wayzata, MN 55391 · Phone: 952-473-0993 · Fax: 952-476-0194
LENNAR.COM
~
''''''''""'
b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not
applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification.
This impervious request is specific to this homeowner due to the fact
that there was an understanding when he purchased the home. He has desired to
build a 10' x 10' patio in his rear yard. We had calculated this with the original
survey. However, the original driveway was not sized appropriately, thus putting
him over the 25% maximum coverage. Without a variance, he is unable to have the
patio that he originally desired, nor the driveway that is now sized appropriately for
him home.
c. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value
or income potential of the parcel of land.
The purpose of this variance application is not for profit or income.
d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self created hardship.
This hardship was not created by the homeowner. It was an error on
the builder's part for not having an appropriate sized driveway on the original
survey.
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.
The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public or
cause injury.
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 increases the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially
diminish or impair property value within the neighborhood.
The proposed variation will not impair the supply of light or air to
adjacent property. It will not create congestion of the public streets. In fact, by
granting this variance and providing this homeowner with an adequately sized
driveway, they will be less likely to store their vehicles in the street, thus reducing
potential congestion. This proposed variation will also not impair neighboring
property values.
If you have any questions, please contact us at 952-249-3000
Sincerely,
LENNAR CORPORATION
-- ~.-/'
/.~~
/" Carole Tofey/.!tm Weaver '
V