1 Variance 8501 Tigua Lane:MEMORANDUM
CITY OF
690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 · FAX (612) 937-5739
'TO:
Board of Adjustments and Appeals
FROM:
Sharmin A1-Jaff, Planner II
DATE:
.
iSUBJ:
[
February 10, 1997
Revise a Condition of.Approval for Variance 83-14, Prohibiting the driveway into
a single family home form being paved; located at 8501 Tigua Lane, legally
described as Lot 5, Block 1, Rice Marsh Manor
Dn October 17, 1983, the City Council approved Variance 83-14. The purpose of the variance
-.equest was to allow a single family home to be built on a riparian lot. The parcel is adjacent to
.~ce Marsh Lake which is classified as Natural Environment and requires all structures to be
setback a minimum of 150 feet from the ordinary high water mark. The horne was approved to
'>e located with a 128 foot setback on one comer and 80 feet on the other comer.
Three conditions were attached to the Variance. These conditions are as follow:
to
The applicant address the drainage concerns of the neighbor directly to the west.
That the driveway and parking apron for the house be constructed of pervious surface
material.
That the applicant make efforts to preserve as much of the existing vegetation as possible
in the construction of the proposed residence.
The home was built in accordance with the variance guidelines. The applicant is in the process
·
of selling his home and the new buyer wishes to pave the driveway. The majority of the homes
within the Rice Marsh Manor subdivision have paved driveways and is a practice that is
encouraged by the City since it minimizes erosion. The zoning ordinance allows a maximum
nard surface coverage of 25%. The coverage of this parcel is well below 25%. Staff cannot find
a reasonable reason to deny the'applicant's request. In fact, we believe it Will prevent any
)otential future erosion problems. Also, staff is in the process of developing a policy which will
be presented to the City Council that require all single family homes to have a paved driveway.
staff is recommending that condition #2, "That the driveway and parMng apron for the house be
constructed of pervious surface material." be waived.
Board of Adjustments and Appeals
February 10, 1997
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
Staff'recommends the Board of Adjustments and Appeals adopt the following motion:
"The Board of Adjustments and Appeals waive condition #2, "That the driveway andpar~'ng
a. pron for the house be constructed of_pervious surface material."
ATTACHMENTS
.
Letter from the applicant dated January 9, 1997.
Staff report dated October 5, 1983.
g:\plan",saknul.doc
Sharmin A1-Jaff
Planning Department, City of Calgary
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
8501 Tigua Circle
Chanhassen, MN 55317
January 9, 1997
Dear Ms. A1-Jaff:
Enclosed please find a copy of a letter to me regarding the above address,
from Bob Waibel, former City Planner. AS I am attempting to sell this
property, I am concerned with condition number 2, regarding the
driveway.
The driveway and parking apron are currently made of crushed rock
("pervious surface material"). However, I prefer that this condition not be
imposed on a future owner.
Of the seven other homes in our Tigua neighborhood, six have blacktop
drives (and aprons). Most were installed after my house was built. It
seems inconsistent that my property bear this condition.
I request respectfully that the City lift this condition.
Sincerely,
A. W. (Mike)
cc: letter, Bob Waibel
: CTYOF
690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
October 26, 1983
Mr. Arthur W. Mulligan
5716 Glen Avenue
Minnetonka, MN 553 43
Dear Mr. Mulligan:
This is to formally notify you that the City Council, at their
meeting of October 17, 1983, acted to approve a 22 foot and 70
foot ordinary high water mark setback variance as requested by
yourself in Planning Case 83-14 Variance for the construcfion of
a residence on Lot 5, Block 1, Rice Lake Manor. The approval was
based upon the four reasons outlined in the analysis section of
the Staff Report dated October 5, 1983 and furthermore included
the following conditions:
1. The applicant'address the drainage concerns of the neighbor
directly to the west.
2. That the driveway and parking apron for the house be
constructed of pervious surface material.
3. That the applicant make efforts to preserve as much of the
existing vegetation as possible in the construction of the
proposed residence.
-.
Should you have any questions concerning the issuance of a
building permit, you should be in contact City Building Official,
George Donnelly.
Sincerely,
Bob Waibel
City Planner
BW:v
cc: George Donnelly
ITY OF
690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FRO~4:
DAT~:
Board of Adjustments and App.eals
Bob Waibel, City Plannerf. y'
October 5, 1983
SUBJ: Shoreland Mangement Ordinance Ordinary High Water Mark Setback
Variance Request, Lot 5, Block 1, Rice Marsh Manor.
PLANNING CASE: 83-14 Variance
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant
Status of Applicant
Arthur W. Mulligan
5716 Glen Avenue
Minnetonka, MN 55343
Owner
Reqh'~s ted Action
:
Ordinary high water mark setback
variance approval.
Purp:Dse
To construct a detached single
family residence as proposed in the
attached plans.
Exis~-ing Zoning
Location
R-i, Single Family Residence
District.
On the northeast side of the ter-
minus of Tigua Lane (see attachment
#1).
Existing Land Use
AdjaCent Land Use
Vacant.
North: Rice Marsh Lake; classified
Natural Environment Waters.
South: Vacant land; zoned R-l,
Single Family Residence.
East: Rice Marsh Lake; classified
Natural Environment Waters.
West: Single family residence;
zoned R-1.
October 5, 1983
Page 2
Applicable Regulations
NR83 (C)(2)(AA)(I), Ordinance 65 -
Structures located on Natural
Environment Waters that are served by
sanitary sewer shall be setback a
minimum of 150 feet from the ordi-
nary high water mark.
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Public Utilities
City sewer service is available to
the property.
ANALYSIS
The proposal is to construct a single-family detached residence on Lot
5, Block 1, Rice Marsh Manor as shown on attachment #4. Rice Marsh Lake
is designated as Natural Environment Waters under the Shoreland
Management Ordinance with a required ordinary high watermark setback of
150 feet. Attachment #4 shows that the respective proposed ordinary
high watermark setbacks for the northwest and northeast corners of
the residence is 128 feet and 80 feet.
Both the property and the proposal have very unique circumstances and
conditions relative to the intent of the Shoreland Management Ordinance
and principles of planning and design. The memorandum from the appli-
cant to staff and the Board of Adjustments and Appeals (see attachment
~2) points out some very salient considerations of ordinance intent
relative to the design and locational features of the proposed resi-
dence. The following is a synopsis of those and other considerations
that staff finds relevant to the request.
1). Attachment #3 illustrates where the required 150 foot ordinary
high watermark setback lies in respect to the property boun-
daries. As can be seen, the pennisula shaped configuration of
the property has a considerably limiting effect on the
available buildable area of the property. It has the ultimate
effect of requiring development to occur on the higher, open
ground to the southwest, thus decreasing the potential to
screen the residence from surrounding properties and shoreland
areas. Additionally, the proposal has a considerably greater
average high watermark setback due to the diverging angles bet-
ween the rear of the house and the shoreline of Rice Marsh
Lake, i.e. the setbacks at the two rear corners of the resi-
dence are 128 feet and 80 feet; however, at the rear center of
the proposed residence, the closest encroachment is 150+ feet
and the linear distance to the end of pennisula is 200+ feet
(see attachment #3).
2). Although the proposed home design is extremely linear and
probably exacerbates the amount of variance needed, it does
result in a low profile design which enhances its qualities of
being visually screened from Rice Marsh Lake and its shoreland
Staff Report
October 5, 1983
Pag~e 3
area. Although the property does have sufficient area for
other design alternatives that would comply with the Shoreland
Management requirements, these alternatives would likewise
result in construction of a residence that would have a much
greater visual prominence due to its location on a higher ele-
vation away from the existing dense vegetation on the site, and
due to the fact that design alternative could very well be
multi-level construction.
3). The proposed location of the residence at the landward edge of
the dense shoreland vegetation appears to be a design measure
that conserves and maintains the natural characteristics of the
shoreland.
4). The overall density of Rice Marsh Manor significantly exceeds
~ the minimum density requirements for Natural Environment Waters
~ thus negating possible over-crowding effects.
The iBoard of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the Council
shall not grant, a variance unless they find the following fact:
1. !That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the
land, building or use referred to in the application for variance.
2. That the granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of substantial property rights.
3. That the granting of the application will not be materially deteri-
mental to the public welfare or injurious to property in the area
adjacent to the property for which the variance is sought.
4. That the granting of the variance will be in keeping with the spirit
and intent of this ordinance.
The Board of Adjustment and Appeals in recommending and the City Council
in g-~anting a variance may impose conditions to insure compliance and to
protect adjacent properties.
Should approval of the request be contemplated, it is vitally important
that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and City Council setforth in
the ~ecord the reasons for such in order to avoid setting an unwarranted
precedent. If approval is granted, it is recommended that such be based
upon ~above staff comments 1 through 4. Furthermore, if approval is
granted, it is recommended that a condition be placed to limit the remo-
val ~f mature shoreland vegetation to only that which is necessary for
the ~onstruction of the proposed residence.
Staff Update
The Bgard of Adjustment and Appeals recommended that the City
Council approve this request as stated in the minutes of October
11 , 1)83 .
Staff Report - Mulligan
October 5, 1983
Page 4
Report Attachments
1. Location map.
2. Memorandum from John Weidt to Bob Waibel and Members of the Board of
Adjustments and Appeals dated Received October 5, 1983.
3. Shoreland Management Setback Graphic.
4. Applicant's Site Plan dated Received September 30, 1983.
5. Board of Adjustments and Appeals minutes dated October 11, 1983.
6. Letter from David Leuthe, DNR dated received October 12, 1983.
/\
"' ~ "' --'=~ IIIlll 7TTT"'IIIIII ' W. ?STH S~T. '
H IGH'W/kY ~-
%.LAKE DRIV ,~/' 3
,,.'/z-7/ / I
.....~ ~ / ~ ' RICE iI,I ,Z R S H ~L A K ~.
Lot 5, Block 1
!
I
OULEVARD
J
I
(C.R ~8 ) i
PONO
~ ~, BOUI F~
/. Attachment #1
TO:
FROM:
MEMOPANDUM
Bob Waibel, Chanhassen City Planner
The Members of the Chanhassen Board of
Adjustment and Appeals
John Weidt, John Weidt Associates
Arthur Mulligan Petition for Variance
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
OCT -
COMMUNITY DEVELO?MENT DEPT
This Memorandum is to provide the City Planner and the members of
the Board of Adjustment and Appeals with background information
regarding the Petition of Arthur Mulligan for a setback variance.
This Memorandum should be read together with the site plan prepared
by John Weidt Associates and submitted with the Petition for
Variance.
The Proposed Home
The home is shown on the site plan submitted with the Petition for
Variance. The home is of a single story low profile design, with
approximately 2500 scuare feet of gross floor space.
The home is designed to take maximum advantage of the unique nature
and character of the site. The site is open at the higher elevation
to the south and heavily wooded with undergrowth and mature trees
as it slopes to the lake. The home is designed to follow the
natural contours of the site and to be tucked into the slope with
a minimal amount of disturbance to the natural contours and
characteristics of the site. This placement of the home not only
preserves the site but also shelters the home from the north to
Attachment % 2
~rovide for maximum energy efficiency. Virtually all significant
~egetation which must be removed will be transplanted and preserved.
~mpervious surfaces have been kept at an absolute minimum. The
driveway will be crushed limestone and there will be no formal lawn.
~11 vegetative cover surrounding the home will be left in its
~atural state.
T~e home has been specifically designed to blend into its surroundings
on this site. The siding and roof will be of rough cedar, which
will weather to a rough bark-like color and texture. The home will
not be visible at all from the road to the south and will be
virtually invisible from both the lake itself and from the homes
on the north side of Rice Marsh Lake. The intent has been to design
a~d construct a home which will be highly energy efficient and will
pXeserve, to the maximum extent possible, the natural environmental
characteristics of this site. A variance from the 150 foot minimum
setback requirement is necessary so that these objectives can be met.
Consistency of the Proposed Home with the Policies
and Purposes of the CityCs Shoreland Ordinance
T~e City of Chanhassen has adopted the State'Department of Natural
R~sources' Regulations as its Shoreland Ordinance. These regulations
haVe been promulgated by the DNR, and adopted by the City, for the
purpose of preserving the City's shoreland areas and water resources.
Th~ Statement of Policy in the Regulations (NR82(a)) identifies
th~ specific purposes of the Shoreland Ordinance, as follows:
1. To preserve and enhance the quality of surface
waters;
2. To conserve the economic and natural environ-
mental values of shorelands; and
3. To provide for the wise utilization of water
and related land resources of the state.
AI~ decisions with respect to enforcement of the Shoreland Ordinance
should always be made with reference to this Statement of Policy and
the purposes contained therein, as they set forth the very rationale
of the Shoreland Ordinance.
In addition to the broad statement of policy set forth in NR 82(a),
Se~ion NR83~c) of the Regulations identifies the specific purposes
for the adoption and enforcement of zoning controls in shoreland
areas. These purposes are as follows:
1. To reduce the effects of overcrowding;
2. To prevent pollution of waters of the state;
3. To provide ample space on lots for sanitary
facilities;
4. To minimize flood damages;
5. To maintain proDerty values;
6. To maintain natural characteristics of shorelands
and adjacent water areas.
Once again, all decisions with respect to enforcement and inter-
pretation of the shoreland zoning controls should be made in light
of and with reference to these purposes for the controls. We believe
that the home which we have designed for .Mr. Mulligan is clearly
consistent with each of these purposes:
1. To reduce the effects of overcrowding.
The site for Mr. Mulligan's home is nearly 4-1/2 acres
in size, which is substantially larger than the minimum
lot size required by the Shoreland Ordinance. The
setback of the home from the ordinary high-water mark
does not have any effect on overcrowding.
2. To prevent pollution of waters of the state.
The home will be served by sanitary sewer and has been
designed to minimize and virtually eliminate surface
water runoff which could contribute to the pollution
of Rice Marsh Lake. Moving the home 70' further back
on the lot would have no impact on the potential of
the home to contribute to pollution of the lake.
3. To provide ample space on lots for sanitary facilities.
This purpose is, of course, not relevant in light of
t~e fact that Mr..Mulligan's home will be served by
municipal sanitary sewer.
4. To minimize flood damages.
The home as proposed is well above the flood plain.
Moving it 70' further from the ordinary high-water
mark will not affect the potential for flood damage.
5. To maintain property values.
It is difficult to see how the proposed construction
of Mr. Mulligan's home could in any way adversely
affect the value of adjoining property. In fact,
development of the property as proposed would in all
likelihood enhance the value of adjoining properties
because the scenic value of this site will be preserved.
6. To maintain natural characteristics of shorelands
and adjacent water areas.
As pointed out above, and discussed throughout this
memorandum, the design of Mr. Mulligan's home is
.~ specifically oriented towards maintaining the natural
characteristics of this site along Rice Marsh Lake.
Constructing the home as proposed, at a lower elevation
and closer to the lake, will contribute significantly
~ more to maintaining the natural characteristics of
~ this shoreland area than moving it further back and
~ up on to higher ground would.
The City's Shoreland Ordinance is a unique piece of legislation
ena~ed for the specific purposes of enhancing and protecting the
uniqae qualities of shoreland areas. We have designed a home for
Mr. ~ulligan which is sensitive to the same considerations which
led ~o the enactment of the Shoreland Ordinance. His home as
proposed would clearly be consistent with and further the policies
and ~urposes of the Shoreland Ordinance.
! Hardship to the Homeowner if the 150' Setback is Enforced
!
Mr. ~ulligan's home has been designed to use the natural characteristics
of t~is site for a highly energy efficient home which will blend into
its %urroundings. This unique piece of property, which slopes down
to tke lake with heavy, undergrowth and foliage, has made it possible
to c~mbine these two goals. The home as designed fits into the
site Go the point of being virtually invisible. As designed, the home
is sheltered from the prevailing northerly winds by heavy foliage
and undergrowth, and exposes over two-thirds of its windows to the
south~for passive solar gain.
If the 150' setback requirement is rigidly applied and enforced
with respect to this home, it will require Mr. Mulligan to move
the home back from the lake and up onto higher ground. It appears
at this time as though the home would have to be moved approximately
70' to the south and would be at least four to eight feet higher
on the site as a result. Re-siting the home in this way will have
a severe impact on several aspects which go right to the heart of
the design of this home:
t. Moving the home away from the sheltering foliage and
undergrowth, and four to eight feet higher up the
hill, will have a severe impact on the energy efficiency
of the home. The home is designed to use the under-
growth and foliage to act as an insulating windscreen
from the prevailing northerly winds. Re-siting the home
would require moving it onto open land, away from the
sheltering effects of the natural vegetation. In
addition, the increased height of the home will expose
it to considerably more wind and consequent heat loss.
2. Re-siting the home will require considerably more
disturbance to the natural vegetation and topography
of this site. Moving the home further south would require
cutting down the small knoll on the west edge of the
property and filling in the area to the east. This
cut and fill operation would result in considerably
more disturbance to the natural characteristics of the
site than that proposed if the home is constructed as
proposed.
3. Perhaps most critical of all is the impact' that
re-siting of the home will have on the visibility of the
home from virtually all directions. Moving the home
up onto higher ground and away from the screening
effects of the natural vegetation on the site will make
the home visible from the road to the south, from the
lake, and from the homes on the north shore of the
lake. We are preparing some sketches for the Board's
review on October llth which will demonstrate the
impact that re-siting the home will have on its visibility
to others.
In addition to the hardships set forth above, mechanical apDlication
of the 150' setback requirement seems inappropriate in this case
for other reasons:
1. Enforcement of a 150' setback with respect to this lot would
--
reduce the buildable portion of the lot to less than 1/4th
of the lot's total area.
·
The home as proposed is a full 80' from the ordinary
high-water mark of Rice Marsh Lake. Therefore, it would
be well within the 75' setback for a recreational
development lake. Although Rice Marsh Lake has been
designated a natural environment lake, the residential
development on the north side of the lake could have
led the DNR to designate this lake as a recreational
development lake.
3. Although the home is proposed to be approximately
80' from the ordinary high-water mark of Rice Marsh
Lake, the nearest open water on Rice Marsh Lake is well
over 500 feet away from the proposed home. This is not
a situation where a homeowner is requesting a setback
variance merely to be closer to open water for his own
recreational benefit. The home has been placed Where it
is exclusively for environmental, aesthetic and energy
related reasons, not for the owner's recreational
convenience.
·
Existing residential construction on Rice Marsh Lake
includes homes within the 150' setback. Furthermore,
many of the homes on the lake have formal lawns which
extend virtually to the water's edge. Mr. Mulligan's
proposed home will have far less impact on the quality
of Rice Marsh Lake than much of the existing development
has.
Aside from the setback requirement, all other zoning
requirements of the DNR Regulations and the City's
Shoreland Ordinance have been met. The lot area, the
location and amount of impervious surface, the preservation
of natural vegetation and ground cover, and all other
policies, guidelines and suggestions contained in the
regulations and the ordinance have been far exceeded. This
is not an instance in which a variance of the setback
requirement will have an adverse environmental effect
on the City's water and related land resources.
Conclusion
DNR Regulation NR 84 provides that variances may be granted where
they'will not circumvent the general purposes and intent of the
zoning controls. In this instance, due to the unique nature of
Mr. ~ulligan's lot, the purposes and intent of the City's Shoreland
Ordinance will best be served by tucking this house into the
hill~as proposed. These purposes should not be defeated by the
mechanical application of an arbitrarily selected 150 foot setback.
e
./
-.
,.
/
'\ ~._..../
,. C.)
,
~ i? ?-4 ......
'! . f "-.;~N .
· i ' '
,.~
'\
'1
Council Meeting October 17, 1983 -4-
· home ~n the lot. The 1~ slopes down to the water and has a natural pla-
teau mbout 20 some feet up from the ordinary high water line and four to
' eight ~or so up from the field to the south. What John (We~dt) and Gary
qittl~) have done is designed a home that utilizes that existing natural
atea~ and fit the home to the natural contour of the lot... Slab on grade
nstr~ction. The intent being to disturb the land on which the house will
be bui't as little as possible. Vegetation in the area of the home will be
transpi'anted. The lake is some 600 feet from this lot. The setback is
from t~.e marsh. The second purpose of the design was to maximize energy
efficiency so the house has been sort of buried in the vegetation for pro-
tectio~ from the northerly winds and will contain over 2/3 of its windows
on the!isouth side which will collect passive solar energy when the trees
drop t~eir leaves in the fall. The intent and design on this house was,
one, t~ preserve the natural and environmental characteristics of this site
and, secondly, to maximize energy efficiency. To deny the variance, we
feel, W~uld work a hardship on the owner who would suffer the loss in
energy '~fficiency. We think the land itself would suffer. There' would be
a consi'~erable more land alteration required if this house had to be moved
back. ~e also think the neighbors would suffer because this hou~se would be
¥isible~whereas as proposed they would see the natural setting basically as
they se~. now. The Board recommended three conditions. All of which are
.
very ag~'eeable.
Mayor H~milton moved that the ordinary high water mark setback variance be
approve~ with the conditions as outlined by staff in a memorandum dated
October~5, 1983. Motion seconded by Councilman Horn. The following voted
i~ favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen
Gevin§ ~nd Horn. No negative votes. Motion carried.
LE OF TAX FORFEITED LANDS- Carver County has submitted a list of thir-
en parcels in Chanhassen--~hat are proposed for tax forfeiture sale.
Mayor Hamilton moved to approve the Certificate of County Board of
Classifi$ation of Forfeited Lands as Provided by Chapter 386, Laws 1935 as
Amended. Motion seconded by Councilman Geving. The following voted in
favor- ~ayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Geving
and Horn, No negative votes. Motion carried.
PROPOSED iZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT DESIGNATING THE CITY COUNCIL AS THE
BOARD OF iADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS, FIRST READING' The Planning Commission
has inT~iiated a propo~ amendment to Section 22 of the Zoning Ordinance
which desiignates the Council as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals.
Mayor Hamilton - The question is an interesting one and I think the
P~anning '~ommission~ probably should have just raised the question rather
than passing it on as a proposed ordinance amendment. There should be some
discussiom here with the staff as to what their thoughts are and perhaps
~ith the ~ity Attorney and'perhaps review what other communities do.
M~ke Thompson - The active member of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals
cou~dn'~t on~nue to attend so then the question came up, could we rotate
the Planning Commission members on some basis through the Board of
Adjustments and Appeals and then I think somebody mentioned that since the
final say'is done with the Council anyway, it seemed like a duplication of
e process. I don't think anybody is objecting to putting the time in, I
talking! about the applicant and the process and the fact that the City
Attorney a~so stated that he thought this should be done.
Minutes of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals
October 11, 1983
Members Present
Dale Geving and Willard Johnson
Staff Present
Bob Waibel, City Planner
Public Present
Peter Beck
John Weidt
A.W. (Mike) Mulligan
Joanne Mulligan
Gary Hittle
Robert Sawyer
Bill Heinlein
Carol Dunsmore
Dan Johnson
Max McMullin
Cecil Waller
Monica & Jack Swenson
Ken Landin
Lynn Landin
7900 Xerxes Ave. S., Minneapolis
85 91 Tigua Circle, Chanhassen
5716 Glen Ave., Minnetonka
5716 Glen Ave., Minnetonka
4171 Main St., St. Bonifacius
48 Sanford Circle, Chaska
721 West 96 th Street, Chaska
730 West 96th Street, Chaska
1140 Pleasant View Road, Chanhassen
16840 S. Shore Lane, Eden Prairie
600 West 94th Street, Chaska
126 Judith Drive, Chaska
720 West 96th Street, Chaska
720 West 96th Street, Chaska
Shoreland Management Setback Variance Request, Lot 5, Block 1,
Rice Marsh Manor, Arthur W. Mulligan, Public Hearing.
Waibel presented the staff report indicating that the request is
for a 70 foot and 22 foot Shoreland Management Ordinary High
Water Mark Setback variance request to the 150 foot ordinary high
water mark setback requirement for Natural Environment Waters.
He stated that for the reasons noted in the analysis section of
the staff report, the proposal appears to be consistent with the
spirit and intent of the Shoreland Management Ordinance and that
any approval of the request should minimally be based upon these
findings in order to avoid setting an unwarranted precedent.
He read into the record a letter received from the property owner
directly to the west (Mr. David Nikolay) stating that he is not
,~ opposed to the proposed variance, however he asked that the
Mulligan's install a driveway culvert across the drainage way
traversing the property and that ongoing maintenance of same
drainageway be conducted.
Peter Beck, representing the applicant, demonstrated on a model
prepared for the proposal, how the plan is to preserve as much of
the natural terrain and vegetation as possible. He noted that
the house would be slab on grade construction and that there will
be no impervious surfaces on the property Other than the house
itself. He presented graphics and photos showing how the pro-
posed house i~c~tion optimally screens and concea].s t~e house
from surrounding properties and from the lake itself.
Attachment ~5
Minutes of Board of Adjustments and Appeals
October 11, 1983
Pa~e 2
A ~otion was made by Willard Johnson to close the public hearing,
seconded by Dale Geving, motion carried.
Da~e Geving made a motion to recommend the City Council approve
th~ Shoreland Management Setback Variances of 22 feet for the
no~hwest corner of the proposed residence and 70 feet for the
nor~theast corner of the proposed residence as requested in
Planing Case 83-14 Variance with the following conditions:
1 ' ~The applicant address'-the drainage concerns of the the neigh-
~bor directly to the west.
2. That the driveway and parking apron for the house be
~constructed of pervious surface material.
3. iThat· the applicant make efforts to preserve as much of the
!existing vegetation as possible in the construction of the
iPr oposed residence.
Motion seconded by Willard Johnson, all in favor and the motion
carr~ied. The Board stated that the reasons for the recommen-
dation for approval were essentially reasons 1 through 4 as noted
in the Staff Report of October 5, 1983 as well as the deter-
mination that the proposal is consistent with the four findings
for Yariance approval as contained in the Zoning Ordinance.
Side Yard Setback Variance Request, 731 West 96th Street, Jack
and ~onica Swenson, Public Hearing.
Waib~l delivered the staff report noting that there does not
appe~ to be any problems with the proposed variance.
Bill ~einlein stated that he was concerned about the placement of
the h~me on the lot. The back of the house would be facing his
lot aJd he feels that this is inconsistent with the rest of the
area.'~ When asked how far his house is from the property line he
indicated that it is approximately 50 feet east of the property
line. ~!
The members of the Board indicated that they cannot dictate how a
house lis to be placed on a lot as long as they meet the minimum
setbadks and building code. They noted that the applicant could
move ~heir house closer to the property line by approximately 14
feet and also closer to the street approximately 10 feet.
Monica Swenson indicated that they feel the better soil for the
placement of the home and the yard is to the easterly property
line w,~ere the house is proposed to be located. Waibel noted
that t~e applicant's plan indicates a setback variance of 83
fe~t, %owever. the northwestern corner of the ,proposed house
encroaches approxi:~a~e~''~ ~ 8 feet closer to the side lot line thus
making the setback variance request 25 feet.
STATE Or:
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55106
PHONE NO. 296-7523 FILE NO.
October 7, 1983
Mr. Robert Waibel, Planner
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive, Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
RE: ARTHUR W. MULLIGAN VARIANCE REQUEST
Dear Mr. Waibel:
I have reviewed the plans and supporting information for this request and I
have field inspected the site with you and representatives of the owner. The
lot has some unique characteristics and the representatives of the owner do
present some reasonable arguments in support of the location of the proposed
building site. It appears that the landowner is concerned about the impact
of the structure on the environment and has planned development of the site
with a minimum disturbance of the wooded portions of the lot. I would agree
that the proposed building site would be visually more inconspicuous than if
the full setback was met. This is only true provided that the wooded portion
of the lot between the proposed building site and the lake is not significantly
altered.
I would encourage the Board of Adjustment to carefully consider all the facts
surrounding this proposal. The applicant should prove that his hardship is
more than one of convenience or strictly economic. If the Board recommends
approval, I would caution that specific findings be documented as to the unique-
ness of the lot and the proven hardships. My concern is that this is a sub-
stantial setback variance and other landowners may be encouraged to also make
application for a variance. Also of great importance in this situation is the
protection of the wooded buffer area between the lake and the proposed building
site. Nearly all of the applicant's reasons for granting of a variance are
associated, in some way, with this wooded buffer area. Conditions should be
attached to the variance that the wooded buffer area be preserved in its natural
state. Allowances could be made for dead or diseased trees, or other minor
selective cutting. Without conditions protecting this area, we would actively
oppose the granting of this variance.
If you have any questions, please contact me at your convenience.
Sincerely,
David P. Leuthe, Area Hydrologist
Metro Region Division of Waters
cc: Steve Prestin, LUMS
ch
Attachment #6
QUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
CiTY OF OHANHASSEN
OCT 19
OO MUNITY DEVELOP ¢,ENT DEPi
~ .. ~ City of Chanhassen
~ i Ca =_r and Hennepin Counties, nnesota
In the matter of Chanhassen 'Planning Case : 83-14 Variance
O~mer: Arthur W. Mulligan Applicant: same
·
S .t~eet Address: P.I.N.: 25-7400050
L~al Description: Lot 5, Block 1, Rice Lake Manor.
,,
Pu~'pose: Approval of a 22 foot and 70 foot ordinary high water mark
set~ack variance to the requirements of Shoreland Management Ordinance
#65~for the construction of a sinqle family detached residence.
Zoning District: R-l, Sinqle Famil¥ Residence District.
~ The above entitled matter was heard before the Chanhassen Board of
Adj%..stments and Appeals on October 11, 1983 and up for final
acn~on before the Chanhassen City Council on October 17, 1983 .
The~City Council ordered that anordinar¥ hiqh water mark setback variance
L.~=~) be granted based upon the documentation contained in
Planning File 83-14 Variance ·
Furthermore with the following conditions:
1. The applicant address the drainage concerns of the neighbor
~irectly to the west.
2. ~hat the driveway and parking apron for the house be constructed
Cf pervious surface material.
3. ,~hat the applicant make efforts to preserve as much of the
~isting vegetation as possible in the construction of the
p~.oposed residence.
Stat~ of Minnesota)
! )ss
CarvQr, County )
I, B~b Waibel City Planner for the City of Chanhassen,
do h~reby certify that I have compared the foregoing with the
original record thereof, and have found the same to be a correct
and t~'ue summary thereof.
Witne~
NOTE
s my hand and official seal of Chanhassen, Minnesota, this
, 19~.
Chanhassen 'City Planner