Loading...
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