Loading...
3 Variance 960 Lake Susan DriveCITY OF BOA DATE: 6/10/96 CC DATE: CASE #: 96-5 VAR By: Rask:v STAFF REPORT I- Z PROPOSAL: LOCATION: APPLICANT: A five (5) foot side yard setback variance request for the construction of a garage addifiom 960 Lake Susan Drive, Lot 7, Block 2, Chonhassen Hills 2nd Addition Dave Bloomquist 960 Lake Susan Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612) 9464215 ~ Submitied to Coaacil PRESENT ZONING: ACREAGE: DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: WATER AND SEWER: PHYSICAL CHARACTER: 2000 LAND USE PLAN: PUD-R, Planned Unit Development- Residential Approximately 12,800 Square Feet N/A N - PUD-R, Planned Unit Development, Residential S - PUD-R, Planned Unit Development, Residential E - PUD-R, Planned Unit Development, Residential W- PUD-R, Planned Unit Development, Residential : Available to the Site The site is level at the location of the proposed garage addition. Low Density Residential Bloomquist Variance June 10, 1996 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-506 (e)(4) states that the side yard setback shall be ten (10) feet in a PUD Single Family Zoned District. BACKGROUND In October of 1986, the City Council approved Chanhassen Hills plat consisting of 180 single family and 52 multi-family units. The development includes 124 acres with a net density of 2.49 units per acre for the single family portion. Multi-family units were approved on the east side of Great Plains Blvd. Lake Susan Drive would be extended to the east to serve these units. As of today's date, this property remains vacant. Lot sizes in Chanhassen Hills range from 11,200 square feet to 150,195 square feet with the median at 14,466 square feet. The average lot size is 17,450 square feet. There are 95 lots below 15,000 square feet and 85 lots above 15,000 square feet. Approximately 130 lots have lot widths over 80 feet. The remaining 50 lots have a width between 65 and 80 feet; however, a majority of these lots are along cul-de-sacs. The applicant is requesting a variance from the setback requirement to add a third stall to his existing garage. In a letter to the Board, the applicant indicates that a unique situation exists with his lot being situated next to a comer lot. This lot configuration provides a 98 foot separation between the two homes. In addition, the applicant finds a hardship in the location of the existing home and attached garage as it is centered in the lot which prevents the placement of a garage addition (see letter from applicant). ANALYSIS Staff recommends denial of the variance appeal as the applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. The Chanhassen City Code provides specific findings that the Board of Adjustment and Appeals must consider when approving a variance. The hardships identified by the applicant are inconsistent with these findings. Further, the applicant enjoys a reasonable use of the property, as defined by city ordinance, with the existing home and two car garage. If approved, the request would create a standard that deviates from other properties within the same subdivision. Staff is unaware of any other variances granted in this subdivision for garage or home additions. The granting of this variance would be inconsistent with comparable properties in the area. All other properties maintain the minimum setback requirements. The lots in Chanhassen Hills were Bloomquist Variance June 10, 1996 Page 3 created, by the developer, knowing that the size of the lot would dictate the size of the home and attached garage. FINDINGS The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: 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 · surrounclin~% 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 applicant already enjoys a reasonable use of the property with the existing home and two car garage. All other homes within 500 feet meet the required side yard setback requirement. The granting of this variance would be inconsistent with comparable properties. Granting a variance for a third stall garage may cause a proliferation of variances as other properties have similar hardships. 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 request, if approved, would create a standard that deviates from the surrounding property within the same subdivision and surrounding area. Other properties in this PUD have reduced lot size and width. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Finding: Whereas, the variance may not be based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the land, the variance would be inconsistent with the neighborhood as no other variances have been granted within this subdivision. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding: The hardship appears to be self-created as the existing home and garage was located 17.5 feet from the south property line. A 90 foot wide lot makes it difficult to add a Bloomquisl Variance June 10, 1996 Page 4 third stall to a garage without encroaching into required setbacks.. These limitations were in place when the applicant purchased the property and he should have been aware of these limiting factors. 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 variance should not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties as appropriate separations will be maintained. 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 values within the neighborhood. Finding: If approved, the proposed garage would be approximately 85 feet from the neighboring home and five feet from the lot line. A five foot separation should not negatively impact light and air to the neighboring property. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustment and Appeals adopt the following motion: "The Board of Adjustments denies the five (5) foot side yard variance request based on the findings presented in the staff report. More specifically, the Board finds the following: 1. The applicant has a reasonable use of the property with the existing home and two car garage. 2. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. 3. The request, if approved, would create a standard that deviates from surrounding properties." ATTACHMENTS 1. Written description of variance request 2. Survey showing proposed garage addition 3. Survey showing garage addition in relation to neighboring property 4. Application 5. List of properties within 500 feet and size of garage on each property. 960 Lake Susan DHve Chnnhassen, MN 55317 City of Chanhassen Planning Department 690 Coulter Drive Chenhassen, MN 55317 RE: Variance Application for 960 Lake Susan Drive, Chanhassen Hills, 2nd Addition We are applying for a variance to add a standard 12 foot, third-car garage stall to our present two-car garage. We need a variance due to the 10-foot setback requirement from the lot line. Approximately 50% of the homes in this development have three car garages, including two of the neighbors on either side of us. We bought the house as an existing model home. The house of our nearest neighbor adjoining the property is 98 feet away from the current garage. They have expressed no concern for our applying for a variance and adding a garage stall. Due to the lot shape, we have 19.5 feet from the present garage to the lot line at the front of the garage and 17.5 feet at the rear of the present garage location. If the house was at least centered on the lot or biased slightly to the east, the variance would not be needed. Because of the placement on the lot, we could put a garage on the other side of the house and run a second driveway without requiring a variance at all. The builder's placement of the house on the lot and the city's approval of the placement has created this undue hardship. / / CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY I Job No. ,~,GT..~ I Bk. c~/~ pg. _ % 'o I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF THE BOUNDARIES OF /..OT '7, ~/~_~:~: ~.. ~/'/~-/"~/~-~-~ A-/~ ~/~ ~ ~~ ~~/~/O~ ~~ ~U~,~INNESOTA DAKIAI ~ I ~01 ICACO Survey for:. ~- ': ~- '~-~C::)Y~n.~_.~ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY ';. :. ~- Gnglneering · '" -'.' '. ""~" :, .." I. andsclpe Archit~ic .... · ~-' Job No. ~P~-~ Bk. H~,<~ ~ ~¢'~'rE OF s ~,..AN O SURVEY ORS /7' P CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION z.5o OWNER: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment .T. empomry Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit ~Vadance Non-conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development* Wetland Alteration Permit Zoning Appeal Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Notification Sign Site Plan Review* Subdivision* X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CU P/SPRNACNAR/VVAP/Metes and B~,unds, $400 Minor SUB) TOTAL FEE $ ~(/'? ',4' A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract C~ s-u'-~ NOTE - When multiple applications am processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. LEGAL DESCRIPTION TOTAL ACREAGE WETLANDS PRESENT PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION REASON FOR THIS REQUEST "FO YES ,Po'b-P.. ~NO This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly pdnted 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 ten business days of application submittal. A wdtten notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application, j 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 'l"~e 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 pdor 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. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public headng requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. · S~gnature of Applicant Date Signature of Fee Owner Application Received on,f Fee Paid~.~5.~ ~'~ Date Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. ADDRESSES WITHIN APPROXIMATEI.Y 500 FEET OF OI IR PROPERTY 910 Lake Susan Drive--2 car garage 920 Lake Susan Drive--2 car garage 930 Lake Susan Drive--2 car garage 940 Lake Susan Drive-2-1/2 car garage 950 Lake Susan Drive--3 ear garage 980 Lake Susan Drive--2 ear garage 990 Lake Susan Drive--3 ear garage 991 Lake Susan Drive--3 car garage 1000 Lake Susan Drive--3 ear garage 1001 Lake Susan Drive--3 car garage 1010 Lake Susan Drive--3 ear garage 1011 Lake Susan Drive--3 ear garage 1020 Lake Susan Drive--3 ear garage 1021 Lake Susan Drive--3 ear garage 8616 Chan. Hills Drive S.--2 car garage 8593 Chart. Hills Drive S.--2 car garage 8750 Lake Susan Court--2 car garage 8821 Lake Susan Court--3 ear garage 8831 Lake Susan Court--2 car garage 8841 Lake Susan Court--2 car garage 8851 Lake Susan Court--3 car garage 8861 Lake Susan Court--2 car garage 8620 Chart. Hills Drive N.--2 car garage 8624 Chan. Hills Drive N.--3 car garage 8628 Chan. Hills Drive N.--2 car garage 8632 Chan. Hills Drive N--2 car garage 8636 Chart. Hills Drive N--3 car garage 1051 Barbara Court--3 car garage 1041 Barbara Court--3 car garage 1031 Barbara Court--3 car garage 991 Barbara Court--2 car garage 1001 Barbara Court--2 car garage 1011 Barbara Court--3 car garage