PC Summary Minutes 2-17-04
\, \
.,- \
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
FEBRUARY 17,2004
Chairman Sacchet called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Uli Sacchet, Steve Lillehaug, Craig Claybaugh, Bethany
Tjornhom, and Rich Slagle
ST AFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob
Generous, Senior Planner; and Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
Debbie Lloyd
Janet D. Paulsen
7302 Laredo Drive
7305 Laredo Drive
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST FOR SETBACK AND LOT COVERAGE VARIANCES TO PERMIT
THE EXPANSION OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON A 0.27 ACRE LOT
ZONED RSF LOCATED AT 3637 SOUTH CEDAR DRIVE, TOM AND JACKIE
JOHNSON, PLANNING CASE No. 04-07.
Public Present:
Name
Address
Dave Bangasser
3633 South Cedar Drive
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Claybaugh asked for
clarification regarding square footage of the side yard variance, the dates for variances
granted in the neighborhood, and minimum square footage requirement for ramblers.
Commissioner Lillehaug asked for clarification on the variances in the area, if it wasn't a
necessary variance on new construction but an existing variance. In other words, a lot of
variances are just simply approved because they were already non-conforming and it was
simply because they were non-conforming but not part of any new construction or
expansion. He asked staff to explain Finding A that indicates the use of the existing
garage which is currently non-conforming. It appears to be a reasonable request.
Commissioner Slagle asked if variances granted in the last few years were on sub-
standard lots. Commissioner Tjornhom asked for clarification regarding impervious
surface and deck. Chairman Sacchet asked staff to point out the 75 foot shoreland
setback line on the plan and if there were any other variances that have been granted that
would provide precedence for this request. Dan Anderson addressed the issues of hard
surface coverage and the need for the side yard variance from an interior design
standpoint. Commissioners asked the applicant to clarify some interior design features
1 -1
. ..1
Planning Commission Summary - February 17, 2004
and their positioning, i.e. the stairs and kitchen cabinetry. Commissioner Lillehaug asked
the applicant to explain why he can't move the kitchen wall in 2.6 feet. Commissioner
Slagle asked for the applicant's thoughts on the deck as far as falling within either the
setback or reaching some type of compromise with the staff's recommendation and your
proposal. Chairman Sacchet opened the public hearing.
Dave Bangasser, 3633 South Cedar Drive, the neighbor directly east of the subject site.
He stated their property has been in his wife's family for about 60 years. Generally they
are very positive about the plan, except for the location of the deck being 5 feet from their
property line. He also expressed concern about an evergreen which would have to go if
the deck was built as proposed. Basically they support all the variances except the side
yard setback. Chairman Sacchet closed the public hearing.
During commission discussion, Commissioner Lillehaug asked for clarification on the
deck and encroachment of the deck, as well as the eaves into the side yard setback.
Commissioner Claybaugh asked the applicant to comment on the status of the evergreen
tree.
Lillehaug moved, Claybaugh seconded that the Planning Commission recommends
denial of the side yard, shoreland and lot coverage variance and recommends
approval of a 19.3 foot front yard setback variance to permit a 10.7 foot front yard
setback for the expansion of the house at 3637 South Cedar Drive, based on the
findings of fact in the staff report and subject to the following conditions:
1. The impervious surface shall be reduced to less than the current 43.9 percent
impervious surface. The driveway shall be removed and re-vegetated as shown
on the attached "Impervious Surface Reduction" schematic to achieve a reduction
in the impervious surface.
2. Tree protection fencing must be installed prior to any work commencing around
all trees near the construction limits. Fencing shall remain in place until all
construction is completed.
3. The applicant shall work with staff to provide a vegetative buffer between the
principle structure and Lake Minnewashta.
4. Permits must be obtained before beginning construction, alterations or demolition.
5. The tower and other elements of the project which are beyond the scope of
Chapter 9 of the Minnesota State Building Code must be designed by a licensed
engIneer.
6. The applicant shall fully preserve the evergreen located to the east of the
deck.
2
Planning Commission Summary - February 17, 2004
All voted in favor, except Slagle and Tjornhom who opposed, and the motion
carried with a vote of 3 to 2.
Since it was not enough of a majority vote, the item automatically goes to City Council
for review. Chairman Sacchet summarized the Planning Commission's concerns as, the
vote of 3 to 2 is that they do agree with the front yard setback. They consider that a
reasonable use. They do not agree with the variance on the side yard setback because
there are ample possibilities to mitigate that, as well as with the deck. Definitely want to
have the coverage reduced, not increased. That's the one area where they can mitigate
the non-conformance, the shoreland setback is the most sensitive in terms of the nature.
There was a concurrence to save the evergreen to the east of the deck. Commissioner
Claybaugh clarified his position on the garage depth of 24 feet. It's less a function of the
garage depth and more a function of making the bedrooms above it work out. As such he
doesn't have reservations about that. Commissioners Slagle and Tjornhom stated they
were in concurrence with the application. It seemed that the neighbor, the applicant and
the builder were willing to work together to reach a reasonable agreement.
Commissioner Lillehaug clarified that with the eaves, it would be a request for a 3 foot 6
inch encroachment into the setback.
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE AMENDMENT FROM
OFFICE INDUSTRIAL TO OFFICE~ AND A REZONING FROM A2 TO OFFICE
INSTITUTIONAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF GALPIN
BOULEV ARD AND NORTH OF L YMAN BOULEVARD, ISD #112, PLANNING
CASE NO. 04-08.
Public Present:
Name
Address
Rod Franks
Paul Schlueter
Ben Merriman
Bev Stofferahn
Ellen Rawson
Lori Juelich
Karen Kennedy
Gary Feldick
Gene Kruchoski
Peggy Emerson
8694 Mary Jane Circle
427 Campfire Cv, Chaska
8156 Mallory Court
8123 Marsh Dri ve
2266 Boulder Road
2246 Stone Creek Lane East
2051 Boulder Road
2231 Boulder Road
2030 Boulder Road
8409 Stone Creek Court
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Slagle asked for
clarification on what's allowed in the proposed zoning district. He also asked if there
were any concerns with a school being located next to a sub-station. Chairman Sacchet
asked if the 95 acres of industrial land was going to be replaced somewhere else in the
city. Bev Stofferahn, Superintendent of District 112, spoke on behalf of the school
3