CC Staff Report 02-23-2015 A
i
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF t TO. Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
CHANHASSEN FROM. Drew Ingvalson, Planning Intern
7700 Market Boulevard DATE February 23, 2015 b ((te/
PO Box 147 Y
Chanhassen MN 55317
SUBJ. Variance 610 West 96th Street—Planning Case#2014-33
Administration
Phone 952 2271100 PROPOSED MOTION
Fax 952 2271110
"The Chanhassen City Council denies the accessory structure variance request,
Building Inspections directs the demolition of the expansion and adopts the attached Findings of
Phone 952 2271180 Fact and Decision"
Fax 952 2271190
Engineering City Council approval requires a majority vote of City Council.
Phone 952 2271160
Fax 952 2271170 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Finance
Phone 952 2271140 The applicant, Robert Boecker, appealed the Board of Appeals and Adjustments
Fax 952 2271110 denial of the variance pursuant to Section 20-29 (d) of the Chanhassen City Code
The applicant also requested that this item be tabled to February 23, 2015
Park&Recreation
Phone 952 2271120 The applicant is requesting relief in the form of an accessory structure variance from
Fax 952 2271110 the zoning ordinance to construct a 1,848 square-foot"horse shelter" expansion on
Recreation Center the existing "pole barn," and to build a 264 square-foot"day shelter." The applicant
2310 Coulter Boulevard proposes to meet all city zoning requirements except for the 1,000 square-foot
Phone 952 2271400 accessory structure maximum in the construction of the horse shelter and day shelter
Fax 952 2271404 on the property
Planning&
Natural Resources The existin g property has four accessory structures accounting for 12,706 square feet
Phone 952 2271130 of accessory structures The maximum accessory structure area allowed is 1,000
Fax 952 2271110 square feet. Approving the applicant's request would put the property at 13,818
square feet of accessory structures
Public Works
7901 Park Place PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY
Phone 952 2271300
Fax 952.2271310 The Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments,held a
Senior Center public hearing on November 18,2014 to review the proposed variance and voted
Phone 952 2271125 unanimously, with a vote of seven to zero,to deny the variance request and directed the
Fax 952 2271110 demolition of the"horse shelter"expansion The Planning Commission found that the
variance request did not meet the requirements for the granting of a variance
Website
www ci chanhassen inn us The Planning Commission minutes for November 18, 2014 are attached
Chanhassen is a Community for Life-Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow
Todd Gerhardt
610 West 96th Street—Planning Case 2014-33
February 23, 2015
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council deny the variance requests and adopt the attached Findings
of Fact and Decision
ATTACHMENTS
1 Findings of Fact and Decision
2 Planning Commission Staff Report dated November 18, 2014.
3 Planning Commission Minutes dated November 18, 2014
4. Email from Robert& Christen Boecker dated November 24, 2014
5 Email from M Chapin Hall dated February 13, 2015.
g\plan\2014 planning cases\2014-33 610 west 96th street variance\executive summary doe
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
IN RE.
Application of Robert&Christin E Boecker for a variance from the 1,000 square-foot accessory
structure limitation to allow for a 1,848 square-foot horse shelter and a 264 square-foot day shelter
on property zoned Agricultural Estate District(A2)—Planning Case 2014-33.
On February 23, 2015, the Chanhassen City Council met at its regularly scheduled meeting to
consider the application The City Council makes the following.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1 The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District (A2)
2 The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density
3 The legal description of the property is as follows.
E 155' OF W 1085' SW '/a NW '/4 EXC. P-22 MNDOT R-O-W PLAT NO 10-22
4 Variance Findings— Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance.
a Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive
plan
Finding: The subject site is zoned Agricultural Estate District(A2). The purpose of the
request is to exceed the 1,000 square-foot accessory structure limitation to provide a
stable and day shelter for horses. The subject property currently has four accessory
structures that have a combined area of 12,706 square feet Upon review, it was
discovered that a contracting business is associated with this location. RTB Landscaping,
Inc. In addition, three other businesses are linked to the property. Boecker Properties,
LLC, Cheap Thrills Motorsports and Devaan—Sellers Industries, LLC Using accessory
structures for non-agricultural uses or residential storage is not keeping in harmony with
the general purpose and intent of the A2 district
b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical
difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the
property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this
1
Chapter. Practical difficulties include,but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems
Finding: Currently, the property owners have reasonable use of the subject property
within the Agricultural Estate District, A2 The property has 12,706 square feet of
accessory structure space available for storage. The addition of a 1,848 square-foot horse
shelter and a 264 square-foot day shelter is not reasonable since there is currently
sufficiently large accessory structures that can be converted for agriculture uses and
storage
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone
Finding: The stated intent of the request is for a horse stable and day shelter
d The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The owner currently has 12,706 square feet of accessory structure space
There are no circumstances unique to the property that preclude its agricultural use This
does not constitute a unique hardship not created by the landowner since a structures in
excess of 1,000 square feet exist on the site Were all non-agricultural uses removed
from the existing structures, sufficiently large structures exist that can be used for a horse
stable and day shelter
e The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality
Finding: There are several properties in proximity to the subject property that have
accessory structures in excess of 1,000 square feet. These accessory structures were
constructed prior to the 2007 ordinance amendment limiting accessory structure size and
are considered to be legal nonconformities. The City also granted variances for two
structures in excess of 1,000 square feet in 2012 However, this area is guided for
residential low density uses in the future Such uses do not require accessory structures
in excess of 1,000 square feet.
f. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 216C 06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
Finding: This does not apply to this request.
5 The planning report#2014-33, dated February 23, 2015,prepared by Drew Ingvalson, et al,
is incorporated herein
2
DECISION
"The Chanhassen City Council denies Planning Case#2014-33, a variance from the 1,000
square-foot accessory structure limitation to allow a 1,848 square-foot horse stable and 264
square-foot day shelter on property zoned Agricultural Estate District, A2 "
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 23rd day of February, 2015.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY.
Mayor
3
`\ Y p� PC DATE: November 18, 2014 �
CC DATE: December 8, 2014 (if necessary)
,J . CITY OF CHANHASSEN
y REVIEW DEADLINE. December 16, 2014
9 % CASE#: 2014-33
N ii A S BY. AF,RG, DI, TJ, ML,JM
PROPOSED MOTION:
"The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies the accessory structure variance
request, directs the demolition of the expansion and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and
Decision."
SUMMARY OF REQUEST• The property owner is requesting a variance to construct a 38 5-
foot by 48-foot horse shelter expansion(1,848 square feet) on the existing"pole barn," and an 11-
foot by 24-foot day shelter(264 square feet). -`' :. a.;r4-ft
4 4:;wt F
t�l gr !'tom ., ti.�,r .• �,-rs � �� !'f
LOCATION: 610 West 96th Street ll a�,:, . �
(NW '/ Sec 25, Twp. 116, Range 23) N, ., ,'r y ,1 ni ° ' �'
APPLICANT: Robert & Christin E Boecker 4 '_i l` . m '_.''
610 West 96th Street -4,...4,,, ,' *if.
Chanhassen, MN 55317 i ?A f, .k :t
PRESENT ZONING: Agriculture Estate District (A-2) Epp;.. '1 - \ir. '1,,, ;a j, - !
t, :1 t ry
2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density l=A `` � i ",
(Net density 1 2 —4 0 units per acre) 6 • '''' �'
�
ACREAGE: 4 28 acres DENSITY: NA ;" t „-, , -`` `..y
4 . 434' ,-. y�40-
F
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in
approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the
standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of
discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established
standards This is a quasi-judicial decision
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting a variance to construct a 1,848 square-foot horse shelter and a 264
square-foot day shelter Currently, the property has 12,706 square feet of accessory structures
The maximum accessory structure area allowed for this property is 1,000 square feet Approving
the applicant's request would put the property at 13,818 square feet of accessory structures.
SCANNED
Planning Commission
610 West 96th Street Variance—Planning Case 2014-33
November 18, 2014
Page 2 of 5
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 20,Article II,Division 3, Variances
Chapter 20,Article IX, "A-2"Agricultural Estate District
Chapter 20,Article XIII, General Supplemental Regulations
Section 20-904 Accessory Structures
BACKGROUND
The house on the property was originally constructed in 1965. Smce then,there have been
numerous expansions and remodels to the house. The subject property currently has four accessory
structures that have a combined area of 12,706 square feet Below is a list of accessory structures
that have been constructed on the property
1 In 1986, a permit was issued for the 24' x 40' garage
2 In 2000,the city issued a permit for a 48' x 72' building.
3. In 2002,the city issued a building permit for a 48' x 100' steel arch storage building.
4 No building permit application can be found for the 36' x 96'
"Agricultural Building" Site Conditions
The current zoning ordinance limits detached accessory structures to a A
maximum of 1,000 square feet This ordinance limiting the area of accessory r ! —
structures in Agricultural Districts was adopted in May of 2007 in response to =L �e�
� p Y p �
contractors purchasing property and building accessory structures to house ^ 01
their businesses City Code prohibits the use of accessory structures for home
occupations _' zlr
At the time of the ordinance amendment, there were discussions regarding
reasonable requests for structures in excess of 1,000 square feet to be used for a
legitimate agricultural use Minnesota State Statute 17.81 —Definitions, 'r used
Subdivision 4 defines agricultural use as "use of land for the production of L
livestock, dairy animals, dairy products,poultry and poultry products,fur
bearing animals, horticultural and nursery stock which is under chapter 18H, 91
fruit of all kinds, vegetables,forage, grains, bees, and apiary products. " It was
decided after the discussions that requests for accessory structures in excess of
Proposed
1,000 square-feet would be reasonable if based on a legitimate agricultural use - _ :4�
The stated intended use of the accessory structure to be located on the subject maim
property is for storage of hay and as a horse stable, which is a permitted
accessory use However, the applicant also runs a contracting business for landscaping Once
the building is constructed, it will be difficult or impossible for the city to regulate that the
buildings are not used for the commercial business instead of the approved stable use.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing variance to construct a 38.5-foot by 48-foot expansion on the existing
"pole barn", 1,848 square-foot horse shelter, and an 11-foot by 24-foot,264 square-foot day shelter
Planning Commission
610 West 96th Street Variance—Planning Case 2014-33
November 18, 2014
Page 3 of 5
The property has four existing accessory structures, a 40.2' x 24.3' garage(964 8 square feet),a
72 2' x 48 1' pole barn(3,472.82 square feet), a 26' x 96' Agricultural Building(2,496 square feet),
and a 48' x 100' storage building(4,800 square feet)
The proposed building expansion contains large overhead doors on the eastern elevation which
repeats the building function of the southern part of the building(see Architectural Plan on next
page) Such doors are not necessary for a horse stable and will permit the use of the building for
equipment storage consistent with contractor's yards or repair bays for automotive repair.
Neither of these uses is permitted in the A-2 district.
Architectural Plan
r
f IIN + ]Il ;�ri ll 1 liiII��[�� .
1 1 I 1 !II I ' I 'IIIYH
I! 1 �N� :;. . `! 11111NItpa all
TI ! J I r I:o 1 i.iimair, z .t
Jjjj1 f .I tlt `1 +i: p�
I, 1,l :,I I, ((( f ! I+ .�� Iro Si+ trip.4,, ' , ,,,-- , h4 rn E 61111E Ir I ! ; 1_l x# 111i1 :Pl t °. i jun
a ' r! dnyt.... -i: +s .11 j 1 111 11 11 ■SAO
...ax90.Wik E6IXRYFR :I ' I i
?Asa' !YawIAY
crux f I ! I _ II _ l II 1
In researching the property, staff discovered that a contracting business is associated with this
location RTB Landscaping, Inc. In addition, three other businesses are linked to the property.
Boecker Properties, LLC, Cheap Thrills Motorsports and Devaan—Sellers Industries, LLC
Staff reviewed city records to determine if any structures in proximity to the subject site were
constructed after the accessory structure limitation was adopted in 2007. In December of 2007,
the Planning Commission approved a 177 square-foot variance to exceed the 1,000 square-foot
maximum for accessory structures The variance was to allow for a 452 square-foot addition to
an existing 725 square-foot detached garage In 2012, City Council approved variances for 620
West 96th Street structure to construct a 2,560 square-foot accessory structure, and 720 West
96th Street to reconstruct and expand by 520 square feet an existing accessory structure, which is
a 40-foot by 37-foot building with a 40-foot by 8-foot covered walkway/lean-to area(1,800
square feet total) In 2012, the city denied a request for a 7,120 square-foot accessory structure at
760 West 96th Street
There was also a structure constructed sometime after 2005, without record of a building permit
It is unclear if this structure was constructed before or after the adoption of the zoning ordinance
in 2007
Planning Commission
610 West 96th Street Vanance—Planning Case 2014-33
November 18, 2014
Page4of5
Accessory Structure Variances in Neighborhood
PC 2012-28, variance PC 2012-12, vanance fora 1,800 PC 2012-10,vanance for 2,560 sq
sq ft accessory structure approved ft accessory structure approved
request for a 7,120 sq. ft •accessory structure denied ,Pti∎ -$ ••,� ,' , t ' 'y•-' -
q� 1s *• SF �h r ♦fir - A
'; ::s iv ti Street
r l '- ', 1-- t • r
4 ' r
rC`\oA jpr ,..` �d •X11
,`' f, n.,, ;r• Subject Site-Structure
r t s• -1.`1%.. ,y`' '- A; constructed after 2005,•
z•e •� • F mfr no permit
dLane �'""';.'� It
If .- ' .t■ S ,
Q i t
I % - ... r t,
A.
DJ
I
Pioneer Trail(CR 14) Pior�e-,r Trail (CR 14)
Y
ss
PC 2007-28, variance for 1,177 sq ft
accessory structure approved
Accessory Structures in Neighborhood
r : . '• CT ' T l r' x-`+i �t , ��� t,» , �%t ♦ \ ♦L.'4 ,i i? t a l ";.'N'f'; _ �ti "!y
A,:v , ,b e , . i ., #/__
:.� �. 'fi f �. .•`. ids, i �f _� `. - �_•} I' r r .
♦a• h •t ppr et s\�i�iR. .F P �,�� ' • r• 4 i r t • �'' ,or
k, . .3IT a z'.0 r r�- �� • •�`'f � :�t
' P h 4,' o:,o.an - r-.,..,;4l - ♦ r* .f'-^1 .''" _ g { it r.
T.` r r .r,_ • t�.. -- mom F , _ I-- 1- ••: M...., =� •, T+;•'
t
4, 1 i 1.�,_r - MIh1 r` i
''-.45.! . ' I lit,E4
I.-
r 6?
OF f tis
` �` t
tr
Planning Commission
610 West 96th Street Variance—Planning Case 2014-33
November 18, 2014
Page 5 of 5
As can be seen from the aerial photo on the previous page, this neighborhood has numerous
accessory structures in excess of 1,000 square feet Staff is concerned with the large size of the
structure Between the existing storage building on the property as well as the proposed
expansion, what is the appropriate amount of accessory structures necessary for the horse
operation? As a comparison, the Degler farm, located on 40 acres at the southeast corner of
Lyman Boulevard and Adubon Road, has a total of 38,155 square feet of accessory structures
At what point do the sizes of the accessory structures create a concentration of properties that in
the future may be used for business operations rather than storage for agricultural of residential
uses'? This concern originates from the possibility that home occupations/businesses may be
conducted out of accessory structures Home occupations/businesses are a common cause of
complaint from residents They often create an excess in parking, traffic and noise
As the property is less than ten acres the agricultural exemption from building code requirements
does not apply. Building permit(s),plan review and approvals are required for the proposed
building.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the variance request, direct the applicant
to demolish the"horse shelter"expansion and adopt the attached Findings of Fact and Decision
ATTACHMENTS
1 Findings of Fact and Decision
2 Development Review Application
3. Applicant's Narrative
4 Land Survey with Proposed Expansion
5 Letter To Whom It May Concern Stamped Received November 5, 2014.
6. Affidavit of Mailing of Public Hearing Notice
g\plan\2014 planning cases\2014-33 610 west 96th street vanance\staff report 610 west 96th street vanance.doc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
IN RE
Application of Robert&Christm E. Boecker for a variance from the 1,000 square-foot accessory
structure limitation to allow for a 1,848 square-foot horse shelter and a 264 square-foot day shelter
on property zoned Agricultural Estate District(A2)—Planning Case 2014-33
On November 18, 2014, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals
and Adjustments,met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application The
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by
published and mailed notice The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
1 The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District(A2)
2 The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density
3. The legal description of the property is as follows.
E 155' OF W 1085' SW '/a NW '/ EXC.. P-22 MNDOT R-O-W PLAT NO 10-22
4 Variance Findings— Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance
a Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive
plan
Finding: The subject site is zoned Agricultural Estate District(A2). The purpose of the
request is to exceed the 1,000 square-foot accessory structure limitation to provide a
stable and day shelter for horses The subject property currently has four accessory
structures that have a combined area of 12,706 square feet. Upon review, it was
discovered that a contracting business is associated with this location. RTB Landscaping,
Inc. In addition, three other businesses are finked to the property. Boecker Properties,
LLC, Cheap Thrills Motorsports and Devaan—Sellers Industries, LLC Using accessory
structures for non-agricultural uses or residential storage is not keeping in harmony with
the general purpose and intent of the A2 district.
1
b When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance "Practical
difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance,means that the
property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this
Chapter Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems
Finding- Currently, the property owners have reasonable use of the subject property
within the Agricultural Estate District, A2. The property has 12,706 square feet of
accessory structure space available for storage The addition of a 1,848 square-foot horse
shelter and a 264 square-foot day shelter is not reasonable since there is currently
sufficiently large accessory structures that can be converted for agriculture uses and
storage
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone
Finding: The stated intent of the request is for a horse stable and day shelter.
d The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner
Finding: The owner currently has 12,706 square feet of accessory structure space
There are no circumstances unique to the property that preclude its agricultural use This
does not constitute a unique hardship not created by the landowner since a structures in
excess of 1,000 square feet exist on the site. Were all non-agricultural uses removed
from the existing structures, sufficiently large structures exist that can be used for a horse
stable and day shelter
e The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality
Finding: There are several properties in proximity to the subject property that have
accessory structures in excess of 1,000 square feet These accessory structures were
constructed prior to the 2007 ordinance amendment limiting accessory structure size and
are considered to be legal nonconformities The City also granted variances for two
structures in excess of 1,000 square feet in 2012 However, this area is guided for
residential low density uses in the future. Such uses do not require accessory structures
in excess of 1,000 square feet
f. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter
Finding: This does not apply to this request
5 The planning report#2014-33, dated November 18, 2014, prepared by Drew Ingvalson, et al,
is incorporated herein
2
DECISION
"The Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustment,
denies Planning Case#2014-33, a variance from the 1,000 square-foot accessory structure
limitation to allow a 1,848 square-foot horse stable and 264 square-foot day shelter on property
zoned Agricultural Estate District, A2 "
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 18'day of November, 2014.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY
Chairman
3
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Mailing dr Division - 0. Box 147, Chanhassen, CITY OF CHAN}LASSN
Mailing Address- P O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone (952) 227-1300/ Fax (952) 227-1110
APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Date Filed 1 O -CT— l 60-Day Review Deadline 1�-.—Uo 6
iLI Planner L ID I Case# ot'--I— .,3
Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply)
❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment $600 ❑ Subdivision
❑ Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers $100 ❑ Create 3 lots or less $300
❑ Create over 3 lots $600 + $15 per lot
❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Metes & Bounds $300 + $50 per lot
❑ Single-Family Residence $325 ❑ Consolidate Lots $150
❑ All Others $425 ❑ Lot Line Adjustment $150
❑ Final Plat* $250
*Requires additional$450 escrow for attorney costs
❑ Interim Use Permit Escrow will be required for other applications through the
❑ In conjunction with Single-Family Residence $325 development contract
❑ All Others $425
❑ Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way $300
❑ Rezoning (Additional recording fees may apply)
❑ Planned Unit Development(PUD) $750 /
El Minor Amendment to existin g PUD $100 Variance $200
❑ All Others $500
❑ Wetland Alteration Permit
❑ Sign Plan Review $150 ❑ Single-Family Residence . $150
❑ All Others . $275
❑ Site Plan Review
❑ Administrative $100 ❑ Zoning Appeal . $100
❑ Commercial/Industrial Districts* $500
Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area ❑ Zoning Ordinance Amendment $500
*Include number of existing employees _ NOTE• When multiple applications are processed concurrently,
and number of new employees the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application
❑ Residential Districts $500
Plus $5 per dwelling unit (Refer to the appropriate Application Checklist for required submittal
information that must accompany this application)
ADDITIONAL REQUIRED FEES:
�( Notification Sign $200 TOTAL FEES: $ .
(City to install and remove)
Property Owners' List within 500' $3 per addres x 3= Received from r.k-' 1 b r
(City to generate-fee determined at pre-application meeting
Escrow for Recording Documents $50 per document Date Received t0-1to—lL{ C_G
C-heek Number Za51
(CUP/SPR/VAC/VAR/WAP/Metes&Bounds Subdivision)
Section 2: Required Information
Project Name B CVCE 14OR6E �HELTE1
Property Address or Location WO WEST c t LoTI t STREET C i-VW\AASSEIS1
Parcel # 25.0253100 Legal Description- SEE ATTPo-kED TRY- STATEMENT
Total Acreage x-1.28 Wetlands Present'? ►1 Yes ❑ No
Present Zoning A2 Requested Zoning A2
Present Land Use Designation LOW -DEK iTT Requested Land Use Designation LOW- DEl,)StT'(
Existing Use of Property Si ) LE F-P f \■_'( Q ES i DE:IJC.E
Description of Proposal ZotJ t tJ Co V Pat ANC..E TO Alto t.J) l cb48 SCE cT HoRSE
1LTe2
Check box if separate narrative is attached
SCANNED
Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant Information
APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as applicant, represent to have obtained
authorization from the property owner to file this application I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to
the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period If this application has not been signed by
the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application 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 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 I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct
Name toRt"v‘t C RE tan.A.) Contact
Address. Phone
City/State/Zip. Cell
Email Fax
Signature Date
PROPERTY OWNER In signing this application, I, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do,
authorize the filing of this application I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those
conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods 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 I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct
Name ROBE2 0ECV-E C2, Contact SPONAE
Address La vJEST Ito Phone °'52 "HS'SL[
City/State/Zip c!i-AL \ S'ELL) y iVti.3 SS"5 Cell 2-t-{t°\
Email Bo 70 e oecILE2e • COV\ 1 Fax
Signature i)-- `• `L Date 10 /1 Lo / 2O11-I
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, refer to the
appropriate Application Checklist and confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and
applicable procedural requirements
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.
PROJECT ENGINEER(if applicable)
Name Contact
Address Phone
City/State/Zip Cell
Email. Fax
Section 4: Notification Information
Who should receive copies of staff reports? *Other Contact Information
IN Property Owner Via. ❑ Email Mailed Paper Copy Name.
►; Applicant Via ❑ Email si Mailed Paper Copy Address.
❑ Engineer Via ❑ Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy City/State/Zip
❑ Other* Via ❑ Email ❑ Mailed Paper Copy Email
Zoning variance request
Robert and Christin Boecker
610 West 96th Street
Chanhassen, MN 55317
We are requesting a zoning variance to allow us to erect an 1848 sq ft horse shelter on our A2 parcel of
land. We need a variance because the current ordinance(changed in 2007) limits structures to 1000
sq ft. This is not adequate to properly house our animals,trailer,tack and feed. When we purchased
our land in 1997,we proceeded to constructed agricultural style buildings to house our personal
property,such as our motor coach,vintage cars, motorcycles and snowmobiles. The ability to construct
such buildings and raise animals was a major factor in choosing to purchase our A2 residential low-
density property Which is slated to remain residential low-density per the 2030 comprehensive plan,so
a variance in this case is consistent with the 2030 plan. We are now financially ready to take the step
into raising and caring for approved animals. Our hopes are that our 2 year old son will develop an
interest in raising and caring for animals as he grows older We think this will be way better for him than
Facebook Farmville or some animal app on his future phone
The shelter is proposed to be an extension of the existing permitted post frame structure. Therefore it
is being constructed of the identical material and by the company that erected the original structure
And seeing that the existing structure fits the aesthetics of the area,the addition will not alter the
character of the locality.
We have already acquired a fence permit and are in the process of getting a day shelter permit
approved by the city. We would like to get the shell of the shelter constructed before it snows,so that
we can finish the interior over the winter and be ready for the animals in the spring.
We would also like to request the ability to raise llamas,goats or sheep, should we decide to go that
route in the future.
T you for your time,
Robert Boecker
Christin Boecker
SCANNED
\ -
•k J
'''.. t`y r.
w "v: 'LA
a "HHNSSS
!0
C7 :1 in
x <.,
I .,..k=-
i
.
` I--- -.
_ir* —- _ _��
_
11 4 *146i-
elb i
o JNLLSt "I
b; '
I
p!,. i - .___,..4,_ T..._.....„_,_ ,
r 1
,,,, 1
---as
vet rola
0 g ti I 1 -, . i
etc•itnre
, lyttkiiiiptr3
C F (8., „ :
k
ii
C' 46- 'i
� ...
of �+
aauw
wig UV
conaosu
ih b
I zy' ihF( s! BE>; N
,.".,.1 v' '..:mil;'";a � , '''-'7.1 � €5 s :II.
411 %, /1t t'„ E. ;:;-,-
� c° '9 g g t F
n Hb 15 'J ti 11
R C7
_ 00.551 1i 3,0,131.139N—, g i EY
k
\ ,
Lail
I
r
rN
T
5
W
x6
W
. t... ‘.:11"-j
0 �I
® 1 gg8 a
izA
C PI
ter! M f ommma �� i, v^ " r^
t I
!I S B)L.1.1
RIT 'ri I� 5
• ' I' 2 € 1 1 1
mw,a 7,..z.
t I € l f
usi
ao
I Ii
Fa i i. to if;} q ' 11
tn . gNg F 1= ° ill
I'''
I \ 1 a B52_
q ,!�:s - S 11101 a III ggiii
I. i z
I
I
To whom it may concern
Bob Boecker never had any intent to put animals in the new addition His intent is to rent out to a individual that
has classic cars or car collection that
had looked into buyng a garage at the classic car place in west Chanhassen and apparantly they worked out
some kind of deal to put this up
It's also my understanding that the southern two bays are rented out to some kind of motorcycle repair shop,
cars come and go, even UPS delivers up there
Also I was told he already has a shed or a hoop barn thing that he never pulled a permit for How did that go
through?
I do not like complaining but the arraogancy displayed at the block party was enough He even stated that he
knew he would get caught but was hoping that the sides of the building would have been put up first and
also that there is no way it's coming down (I got a Lawyer) As one person said he has a mini mall up there If
all this was for his own use no one would have a problem, but he seems to have gone a little extreme this time
He will buy the animals and put up a fence to prove his point but that was never the intent I do not know if this
is any use as I have to remain anonymous I do not desire any hard feelings or ramifications from some of the
neighbors
Some see this as a win if he gets this passed as they can build additional out buildings also
RECEIVED
NOV - 5 2014
CHANHASSEr`
li
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss
COUNTY OF CARVER )
I, Karen J. Engelhardt,being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on
November 7, 2014, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public
Hearing for 610 West 96th Street Variance Request—Planning Case 2014-33 to the persons
named on attached Exhibit"A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to
such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail
with postage fully prepaid thereon, that the names and addresses of such owners were those
appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by
other appropriate records.
--n J E gel'Iardt, D ty Clerk
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this OPIday of ve,ir)t,— , 2014 ,°'H''''€ KIM T. MEUWISSEN
.` Notary Public-Minnesota
,..+ My Commission Expires Jan 31,2015
Notary Pu he
p .,.' N u) 0) ..-. +-' .0 0 G) m o ° N a E" Hi a a> m o
n m to O - ° C c �-. ¢ 2 -0 0 o 1 §t
Ca U N -0 ..C - U to C @ C O U O c O Zoo E- cma)>,, mom > > °
N CO C - N E c O C a c 2 2 ..'-
O O C s m o Ea o a r s o a� o m�
a) ca a) Q O c 3 I C Q OU � O >O c OL � E'o °) > aEaEm NOa) Oo (_ a)
Cz-. -O C >-, co -0 O F O) N O � U fO c � � >y2 � a °oc2C ..>_,'-2 c_' cw
1- o (q U of '' U N Q 3m O O R m (.>u mm0EtE a NYaa) o > U-o
d Nm N O u 0 E 0 O a) V t O 7 U U O -0 Ezm c= oo3v) ` �o(0 f-: m o
O E o Y U co U c C � O O H 0 E p �O � � O O � � d ae, a)a) E,c w, mO o
O a) L O N O �� Qc QO a) +� E +� - � o E-,-, as otc
C CD .a O '- L° C U O U E R a .-. 6)2-w >_m a.- o
0) O_ O 2 (n •�t .L' N Q O) 0 (n O M 0 c � O 0 � ~ mQ0 S ,, e) oco� y0_ o o 5$ s-
•y ~ O>p O N c +� N C O C y .c 0) c 0 °c acia)u _ Em-0 co oa,
(Q •y O .E N d mil': C E O Q pv ° d' C U .o ' c -°co0 CE��m� c Nm= ooc Ulm a)
_ E `- a) U U - - m = �O 0 N O O N C N .,fir OU C d o-Eo0 o a0 c N m a`Ni ° E 6 o`no U m
() n F2 U x0 a) ` O 0 O > c) 0 0 C O' N U t 0 0 0 3 .5 O O o_E N , `m > °-w r o ° a) E E
O -p(Na) ((0 2 U > _V 0 0).2 N N > U CO Q C N U O T-O E (0 E 3 E §,� E°.o j o .17)- D rn,d
ra V 00 C 2 0 O_^ O d � � c > QO O Q c O -c Q > d -0 c a)¢r 8U7 ° m-o ar o)" E °
7 \ O ~ CON O _ d Q c C 0 =_ 4) U N 4) E Q U U O OL _ ) o o h , c o)E- E cca c c u N ° 8) a) O C
C. c ,- N L O cQ m w (OQ g C *. N _ C co 7 (...) 0. 01-4 -7) O'UOo E aa a) a) o °-° v
O > U O C N (O 3 O 3 U 0 0 - _ u) c a.o c c o o c N E w N ° . a)
0 C .Q N V C "-' N c .,c-. N 0 O C ` a) 4) '0 N _E 0 >, C m-o_, m n w o a-c u w (al c:, 2 0 c
C Ea.) - N O O Vim' (O O U 04- 0 3 G) E a m m c-_ ° c Ta= o
d0 (D :F, a) > 0 C UU . 0 5Na) c'_ oo. 8UmEQpO0N-0 a3 °
> c (O4- U L O O 0U (6 N co c O N O V) c m. 3o� m ma) ° a) a) o co
IZ 0 = � > � W 0 ro m a) 2 i- C'= ac C 0 �O 2 c -O NM (>O - � O Em a¢E= o � vo .e,2E m� �mai
O C Z °-) U 0 0 O - p E UO U O_ CO > O_ O QO CO 1- 0 dV ca ma - 3sc ° Ncr ° c2 4—
Z 0 m _ ' C i C u c 0-t' () N (O E v Q (6 O U O -0 , O Q 3 C) E E 0 0 u aH °~ N N 2 o o a o) r ac
M (O - (O N w O >O O '- @ 75 _c @ L O .0 O 3 ->'' U O (O N C) d -. c o¢ N Q N v a a v U a c c cz °°
as w = = COUN > u O_ U52 H0W .._' 70 O - N ,_ ,. 61) > m-o ° � 2 ° EomrnaE"-2yv`°, (" o
. n co > ND C 0 O O O QOM 0, N 0 (ON Q0 ((0 O (d 0 0-E,, 0>.nc0U ° NO) a) a a) c 0.
C I— . 0lY - < IY COQ I- (O (O Qr- c'i CO !- ON a) a) L E N 0.11. >.y> C )Ymmrnoat owo° Eac
co E > c.0 a) o'- c 43 3 ,n E a)" E, 3a o as
o U ° m E.o U a) O a) O ° a 0)a
C
V F2 a a) c¢ r'm E1-2 E as °N O0)Y a E m2-o°°
C yaav2 E0229om(,) ao NOCEcc
G) Qr, N odor 3 NN� ooN � �� maavaC °��
a+ >Zd CI) 0_ aUEc El.' -@- Ncv °omm� o0
�- 0 �0 0 Ac = d Cy 3omUoaaoE0N =ow3E..n° 03a_"i0o
0 V Q ++ d V) d ->-ooc `) aN2.ocEEU co ° . g)aca°> mc0
,.0.. 0 O Q O 0 CU ..o a) E T� aNmamrmo ° o > c @ °cc � ° 8 �o
O O L 0. .- O �, O 0 .-,coD:amcoHww °)UU� 3ain¢ mammN
0 J d < 0. J (C CJU 0 . • • • •
a)
"O p N >, N vS o 0 o m >
O a) 0 0 +_' O N o w c c� N e -or
>, O � co Ln N -- .= G) a) m 0 ° a) a ( c >,� aa, 20
CO "- N i cn > 0 0 (O (n "- 1,_ = t > 0-0 m Z `o a o m c m o y C t
O 7 O (O N «' O O ..,, y. r a) a a) N 2--- = o (Dog
E -0
CO (n 1 O � O N - O c O O c c 0 a E>.o E To r > an� m -o a) :°. 3 m
E ac) N 0 co 0)- C V_ co co C L E C O O i m 45 ( o.n` o Y.e w ,r a c 2 2 >,0
aa)) co X O 7 Cl) 3 O Q O (� QE > N O o ° o > ° Ea@ NUS O� c= c 8.
C s c > O Q C O di N 0 a O N >Z a '2 m >L2 >,o-'o °t wm cc-
> O E C 'O O () C m t.. C c 0 >) N 2 N c rn., m O °'c °. ma °., p o
a+ O N U y i U a) U - 3 O cu - 0 O C °v m- ° Es E@ N" o o > Ua
E Ira d m O O c.) O (n 0 N 1:5 N _d 'C o c- o E 3 E g'E, > m
CD E a N O U O C 2 -c 0. 0_- -0 E E >,� O 3 N O •a Ln a) a� m .Y.c v o E o E m °m ill
0. i U (O c v- O 0 7 C - E _C R a) m OmEE uN o c O. O N "- O E t- - (0 a Y o aE' o _m m
0) 0 O 2 mod' w u) a - 0 NU U C C ca 0 >, I- m °0 Em0r3ocoo8C o `er"° ,-O
c o >, C N '�' O O M O O O O d c m c 0 N E o" 3 o c ° E o °
•C 0 (O �>O N 0) C C (Da) 4_ (O E "J 0 d' co U -0 � � �, 0 c °-co0cE,�mcc02-c a)m U �m
d a ti N co(O (O O O 0 O OL O 00 . Q_c 0 0 d ++ =o a)CD o ate) o am ai o-oo aa)) m 3 a s >,o(n
_ c N N O L = 1 c E,n E a- rn E ° Y o r O)
a N U - - d � � L O 3 � vL- CO(O ON C 4) U 0 d o-oco- �yc � m � oE ° ao UJc
V p aa) L U 0 N ` O �' 0 0 O N 0 O 0 O N 3 3:2 O U E w Y m E m >-oo a Y.c o a .c c C
O -a N (O c. Y y O 0 0)a L O > vaj (O O O O U 0 ° (1)
-O (0 E N E 3 a ai E o L e o E o ° a 8 m
b O U c O Q >, 3 c a ° o�-a .c 2,5 a.
� � � � � p (QNO d � OC � > QOO d� c � UUO- O .O_, � c > a>r=-Uc= m�v) ° Eo 0) - ° a)
CO O N O C O U U N O E O_ O 0 O 0-0Qm co>o ° Emc Nor c `mcr.
i O CO (v0 CA = 0 O U O O' OOO E as= oa> c ` N 0 o
O. C 4) >) 0 U C Q w 7 C 1- N C U) N N N U c o ° N N ° s a)u
O C -0 OU O O c a) c _E OL (O -' N p) O „.,(1) E O > C 3 C .O to ammE ., ( °woac co2uc)ac> 0 ano
C c N fn O U L O c co C N u) O - O > 0_- oUc .a. ... 0 0 3 °
G) C > c C (O a0- In C C� N O 0- 4) > (0 ) L N N (O 7 O O O (A c "c `> C m y 3 O y@ m m a) ° ao) o ao a c o
0. OcCO > NWUCO0 a) 2OLC' 0' UCC0 �OO` ccNM > - "- .0O uSEag°) > aQoUO °cvon)a°E ?2 iam)
0 c Z 0 0 2 -O O E U c, O- C = Q O L ..-. Q (O (O T- � u) t OV ca m °- w3� E NcLU � v( a
Z d T A U . 6 C N C QE' C � CO � U Q co w 0 CD -O � O Q 3 C) E E co)a CL i)'CO_C ,S 8 . E 2 o o a� L aC
0 (O = (O U U >N o O (O _c "- N E o 3 '"> fO (N C d a+ c p¢ a) > (7i vim- QvLU ao� m o cy.2 , = COUN >OoOUoU (/) 1— UW '-' >.,° a.)ODU0 - N "- 4- CC0 >a- `o2oamEUccorn0.E' `) cN _N" o
O ' >, Op c O a)--
a—
OM E OCN d0 � o a) >,-• E o a) ma>Uc o)L
c 7 co N � p} O � - 0_.,0 C O CL0 O ,_a) IS ,— Oo >,c � o-VYmmrna>-r N-c QEoc
co ♦- v U �' .- Q COQ I- (O as �� NC7d +' co 06) L V) 0.u- ? (UQ omELUac) o a�>(o3° N-3-'U °o
0 o-ooC tEEHYEY, O oo)Yaoa, o)Ea
to = caa)) omn , ° NOO mao f aE� Ecu
c c , @ 8-2.2 m N a) ° a)cn a 0 ° N O G C C C
O Q", V. oaoE 3 NNaooN � mwrnaaiaaTIa2
E ., >ZO u) d' „5. NccL) °o .a) o0
~ 0 O CO O O O 0 3 -OmUo °.aoEac) N_ = ow -° n° o3oEm
0 (� C O = � v N rn� 2 2
CO Q. cu ++ d Cl) d ., oc `-) aa)) cEEUcooco)aciimmca)
+0., 0 0 Q O V � +s+ d >,70Eamr a) 000Y cm �m c `l20 ,
CO 0 - Q L O +, c 0 cnKO_ cocoHw-5 2UU2 3 ain¢ a) am a N
0 J 0. < 0. J To a0 U . • • • .
ANDREW T RIEGERT DOUGLAS J & REBECCA A DUCHON DOUGLAS L & PAULA JO STEEN
620 96TH ST W 9630 FOXFORD RD 701 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8601 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8688 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8603
GAYLE 0 & LOIS J DEGLER HALLA FAMILY LP HALLA FAMILY LP
541 PINEVIEW CT 6601 MOHAWK TRL 495 PIONEER TRL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8697 EDINA MN 55439-1029 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4718
JAMES &ARLENE J CHURCH JAMES H &TERESA 0 GIUSTI JAMES M &TERESA A BYRNE
611 96TH ST W 540 PINEVIEW CT 700 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8602 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8697 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8603
JOHN &ANNA MAE MAKELA KEVIN L & LORI A BOGENREIF ROBERT &CHRISTIN E BOECKER
8503 OLD TOWNE CT 631 96TH ST W 610 96TH ST W
KNOXVILLE TN 37923-6361 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8602 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8601
ROGER A& KIMBERLY A LEE ROGER G NOVOTNY STEPHEN J & COLEEN M WILKER
600 96TH ST W 560 PINEVIEW CT 621 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8601 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8697 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8602
THEODORE B & KAREN K HASSE TIMOTHY A& DAWNE M ERHART TIMOTHY J LOWE
630 96TH ST W 9611 MEADOWLARK LN 601 96TH ST W
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8601 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8695 CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8602
US BANK NA AS TRUSTEE
10790 RANCHO BERNARDO RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92127-5705
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 18,2014
Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Lisa Hokkanen, Kim Tennyson,
Maryam Yusuf, Steve Weick and Dan Campion
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior
Planner; Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner, and Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineer
PUBLIC HEARING:
610 WEST 96TH STREET: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES IN EXCESS OF 1,000 SQUARE FEET ON APPROXIMATELY 4.5
ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED AGRICULTURAL ESTATE (A2)AND LOCATED AT
610 WEST 96TH STREET. APPLICANT/OWNER: ROBERT AND CHRISTIN
BOECKER, PLANNING CASE 2014-33.
Aanenson. Before he starts I did want to point out that we did receive some additional
information that was handed out to all the commissioners so, the applicant may address it but
otherwise if there's questions to staff we'd be happy to answer that at the end of the presentation
Aller Great and for those watching at home I did look at the update and it's been on the website
since this afternoon as well so it's there for your use and your perusal
Generous. Thank you Chairman Aller, commissioners. That was my first material we did hand
out the material that was included today It contains a petition, a letter and an alternative design
for this project I would point out that I showed our stable person the alternative design and they
said that that would not work because it's, for a stable you need to have an enclosed structure so
just for informational purposes The applicant are Robert and Christin Boecker The property is
located at 610 West 96th Street This is just north of Pioneer Trail and west of the Great Plains
Boulevard, Highway 101. It's the second property on the south side of West 96th Street as you
come into this development This property is guided in the city's Comprehensive Plan for
residential low density uses. That means densities of 1.2 to 4 units per acre or in suburban
standards about third acre lots Currently it's, depending on the number, 4 28 to 4 49 acres in
size The property is in the 2010 Metropolitan Urban Service Area so it could receive urban
services at any time. However it is dependent on the development of the property to the
northwest to serve this with additional sewer and water services The property is zoned A2,
Agricultural Estate District In this City's parlance that's really a holding category. It preserves
rural character but it doesn't, it limits the types of uses that can be there and the minimum lot
size is at 2 V2 acres per lot The City's Comprehensive Plan does not anticipate preserving
agricultural uses within the community in the long term. However we do support in greater
Carver County the preservation of agricultural uses in western Carver County The south half of
this property is in an existing wetland The property owner's requesting a variance to construct a
38.5 foot by 48 foot horse shelter adjacent, expansion on an existing building as well as a 11 by
24 foot day shelter to the south of the second existing building on the property. This would be a
total of 14,818 square feet of accessory structures on the property I should point out on the first
page the property, the 13,818 square feet is the variance request from the 1,000 square foot
accessory structure so Section 20-904 of the City Code limits accessory structures to 1,000
square feet in the A2, RR, RSF, RLM and R-4 Districts This ordinance was adopted in May,
2007. The City amended the accessory structures to limit the 1,000 square foot city wide so it
applies to all these properties throughout the community, not to just this area This was, an
amendment was in response to contractor's purchasing these large lots with accessory structures
or large lots and building accessory structures to run contracting businesses out of them and
turning the accessory structures into business operations However city code does not permit the
use of accessory structures for a business use. It's for personal and private uses only
Agricultural buildings existing on property that are about 12,760 square foot of accessory
buildings Agricultural buildings and uses are limited to those uses directly related to
agricultural businesses Under State Statute agricultural buildings are designed, constructed and
used to house farm implements, livestock or agricultural produce or products They're not for
any other use so if you want an Ag designation you have to meet that criteria Additionally you
have to have at least 10 acres of contiguous land use for agricultural purposes which is
cultivation, raising of livestock, things, a fruit farm, things like that And finally if you have less
than 10 acres it has to be used exclusively for agricultural purposes and intensely used for
agricultural purposes so it should be cultivated And that's the only way that you're able to
maintain or receive the agricultural exemption for agricultural buildings On this property there
are 4 existing accessory buildings The first one permitted in 1986 was a 24 by 40 square foot
garage next to the building That shows up on this map as 1 Number 2 is a 48 by 72 foot
building that the applicant is proposing to expand as part of this application The third one is a
48 by 100 square foot steel arch building That's on the south end of the property. And the
fourth building is a building that was constructed and we cannot find a building permit on file for
that structure. This area has had a history of properties coming in for requests to variances to the
1,000 square foot requirement The existing property, the property immediately to the west
received a variance for a 2,560 square foot accessory structure and then there's 1,800 square foot
a little way down the road from that There was a small one off of Homestead Lane approved
and then there was one that was denied and then the property owner actually withdrew his
request for the variance at the end of West 96th Street Part of staff's concern with approval of
this variance application is with the kind, the character of the neighborhood that would be
created and maintained out here While this property is guided for redevelopment in the future at
suburban densities, the continuation of these large buildings would provide an impetus to not
make that change possible or feasible in the future The concern originates from the possibility
that large accessory structures are used in conjunction with home occupations Home
occupations are intended to be conducted out of a residence and maintain a residential
appearance When the operations are moved into accessory structures they become common
causes of complaints by neighbors. They often create excess parking, traffic and noise Staff is
concerned that the property would be sold in the future It may be purchased by a person with
the intentions of operating a home occupation out of the accessory structure Staff further
believes that the use is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan And
then basically the architecture would continue the use of the materials that are on the existing
structure Here's a picture, they did begin the building of this expansion in the future The City
issued a stop work order and told them they needed to come in through the variance process to
construct that building Here's a close up on the expansion area And this is the existing storage
building on the south end of the property This is the quote, agricultural building that was built
without a permit Staff is recommending denial of the variance request and directing to the
applicant to demolish the expansion area and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and
Decision With that I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Aller. Anyone have any questions at this point?
Weick I do
Aller Commissioner Weick
Weick Thanks Just a clarification on this 20-904 The accessory structure. It said they're not
to exceed 1,000 square feet Does it say anything about the number of 1,000 square foot?
Generous. No, it would be cumulative so they could have four 250 square foot accessory.
Weick But not four 1,000 square foot
Generous. Correct.
Weick. Okay I just wanted that clarification Thank you
Aller Okay, would the, hearing no other questions Oh, Commissioner Campion.
Campion. One question. so prior to 2007 was there any requirement on the accessory structure
sizes?
Generous Only, Mr Chairman Only as far as you could only have 20 percent site coverage
and you had to meet setbacks
Campion Okay
Aller. Any additional questions? Hearing none we'll go ahead and hear from the applicant
Welcome sir If you could state your name and address for the record that'd be great.
Robert Boecker I am Robert Boecker The applicant. I don't even know where to begin. This
process, it just seems that it's so geared to not help the resident that you guys all represent
Myself. There's nothing we're trying to pull over. We've got a very well laid out plan for what
we want to do We think we've articulated it through there that what the structure will be used
for and I guess I just the whole process of dealing with staff on this I don't feel that in any way
the City would like to help approve or do any type of project like this because I happen to own a
property that's guided differently than, I'm going to say it There's an agenda for my property
other than what I have. And when I bought the property in 1997 it was so that I could have
storage structures for my classic cars My snowmobiles. My motorcycles and to be able to have
animals All right here in Chanhassen It's kind of the dream to be able to do that but I feel that
since we're being guided differently that we're being pushed out and not allowed to do these
things. Saying that what we're doing will not fit the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. How would this
building existing on my property affect that plant Bob says it because then no one would want
to buy it because there's a building already there What if I wanted to just take the structure and
turn it into a house? When we can so do so When the utilities are there. Maybe that's a use for
it so then there's no reason that the building can't be there and have use in the future in the way
that our land is being guided. So there's so many options that are not even talked about here
And as to the businesses, staff has never once asked me what I do for a living Never once did
you ask me that But the report says I own a landscape company I haven't landscaped in 8
years but yet that's what the staff says that I do for a living. Never once did we get an interview
where you asked me any of the questions to any of the points that are in here and I think that's
sad And I just feel like this is all geared against us, the landowners so One thing that the staff
didn't put out was the, or talk anything about was the alternative option. Do you all have that in
front of you? Because part of the issue is that they feel that they won't be able to control what
the structure's used for so my wife and I talked. We changed the plan so that the building itself
is totally transparent You can see directly through the building any side that you were standing
on by simply removing portions of the siding Leaving the structure intact so does that all make
sense when you look at those plans? Okay. Now you're saying that Carol Dunsmore says that
that then cannot be used as a stable? Is that what you said Bob?
Aanenson. Mr. Chair, if you could have the applicant address the Chair and then direct the staff
with the questions I'd, I think that'd be helpful
Aller Why don't we go ahead,that'd be great
Robert Boecker. So if I have a question of staff.
Aller You should address me and then we'll get it answered
Robert Boecker Okay Alright Andrew
Aanenson. If you want to put this over here
Robert Boecker. Oh, okay. Oh I thought you said they were all going to get a copy.
Aanenson. They do
Aller But anybody
Robert Boecker. Okay, so I can point at it and then you can see
Aanenson. Yeah.
Robert Boecker. Okay Alright As we talked about you can see that here, this façade would be
Highway 101 would be right here. So without any doors on this side you can see directly into
the structure On the reverse side of that structure would be the west This one here By
II
removing this whole section here you would be able to stand here, or from Highway 101 look
directly through the building and know exactly what's in the building So the use of the structure
is totally transparent. That's why we're proposing this to kind of put that issue to rest As far as
putting horses in there, could I have Andrew clarify whether or not the City inspector, Carol
Dunsmore said that horses could not be stabled in a structure
Aller That's what I believe was stated, is that correct?
Generous Yes When I showed her this plan she said that the structure must be enclosed for the
shelter for the horses
Robert Boecker So inside of this structure, can the two horse stalls themselves be enclosed?
Aller If you know Bob, I don't know
Generous. I'm not sure.
Aller I wouldn't know without asking her
Robert Boecker So as a requirement when Carol would do the inspection, part of the
requirement would be that the horse stalls themselves would need to be enclosed which would
not be an issue to enclose them within the structure.
Aller. Although wouldn't that defeat the purpose of having it open? If you have enclosures
Robert Boecker No because the horses will have their own structure to keep them from the
elements. The biggest issue is that you want this structure, the canopy structure so that you can
put your hay and your tack and all your feed in there and keep that dry. The biggest issue with
staff says well you've got other buildings Why don't you just go ahead and put the horses in the
other buildings My other buildings have classic cars in them. Classic motorcycles in them I
am not going to bring feed,hay, things that are going to bring rodents next to those cars There's
a reason I have them in there so. Just look at my notes here At the time in the ordinance
amendment it was decided that the discussions, after the discussions the request for accessory
structures in excess of 1,000 square feet would be reasonable if based on a legitimate agricultural
use. I believe this is a legitimate agricultural use to house our horses,hay, tack and one other
thing we would also like to store in there is our horse trailer We're planning on getting a 4 place
trailer with a bunk That's a lot of money for a trailer that I don't want sitting outside but I was
informed by staff that I could not store that trailer inside of this building because it's personal
property Are my horses not personal property Can they go in the structures So these are the
types of what I'm getting from staff when I'm trying to work through this and it's just, it's very
frustrating The overhead door sizes were in question in here. First of all they were designed
that way to match the other doors so that the building was uniform Second, I asked staff what
the average height of a horse trailer was with a hay rack on top. They didn't know My doors
are 11 feet on this They are not super tall doors but it will be 10 feet to the top of the hay rack
so it will fit Personal property. Just for the City's record I will address the hoop house The
hoop house was constructed in 2006 It's a non-permanent structure. We didn't actually realize
at the time that we would need a permit for the hoop house so that's why there is no application
for it. The hoop house. Complaints. Staff said that there would be, this type of property and
these buildings will bring up more complaints and I was wondering if staff has an actual
complaint that was directed towards my property or caused by my property in any, because of
any of my buildings or anything that I have
Aller. There is none in the report nght now. Let me ask Bob, are we aware of any right now
Generous. Not that I'm aware of Not for this specific property We've had it for other
properties.
Aller In general, okay
Robert Boecker Okay The 10 acre exemption The other thing that I wanted, I had a
supplement that I had put in there was the City's, that top one right there If you guys have this
This is the zoning permit You guys all have a copy of this If you read through this,what does
it take to get a zoning permit and what do you need a zoning permit for? Very last item on the
list is agricultural buildings so when we looked at this to build our agricultural horse shed we
assumed that we would be able to, and reading through this it makes it sound very easy to go in
and we'll get a zoning permit because it's an ag building So that's what we assumed Nowhere
on here, which I would think this would be a great place to put, that you must have 10 acres to
have an agricultural building None of us knew that as homeowners that we needed 10 acres
That we live on agricultural land but cannot own an agricultural building I don't get that and
that's really something that should have been on this page if this is where I'm going to to find
out what I can and cannot do All variance requests are automatically denied by staff So from
the first day I went in to start working on this I was informed that no matter what, it doesn't
matter what the findings are, it will be denied Or that's what the request will be, to be denied.
Once again it's,there's a frustration there that the city I live in doesn't feel like they want to help
us in any way to do this other than to figure out how can we not let this happen. That's the only
feeling you get and that's once again frustrating And along those lines if I have to come in, in
front of a committee that also views the same guide, guided plan for my property,how is that not
a conflict of interest for that party to be able to decide what I do on my land. It's out there. It's
guided My land is guided differently than it was when I bought the land and in 2007 we know
that changed. That's going to be the last issue that I'm going to bring up is that in 2007 these
changes were made How was I informed that that was going to happens Does the council know
how that happened
Aller I'm sure there were noticed hearings
Robert Boecker There was a public notice in the Chan Villager to tell us about it. Does
everybody agree that is the best way to contact? How many homeowners are there that are
affected by this? Are there 500? 100? Just a guess. Let's just throw a guess out there
Aanenson Well it'd be pretty much the whole southern part of the city It's every, anything
that's zoned residential. This applies to anybody that has residentially zoned property so it's,
which we have almost 9,000 homes in the city Those are ones that have properties on them so
it's the entire city that is residentially guided.
Robert Boecker And something like this that affects, we all agree this affects the value of our
property immensely. The 2007 decision affects our property value immensely Do we agree on
that?
Aller. I don't have enough facts to say I agree or not
Robert Boecker. Well, I'm going to put it out there that it affects us immensely and if we're not
people that read the Chan Villager then we miss something that obviously affects a lot of us and I
would venture to say if we sent out that, if we did do a mailer that in 2007 and put it out to vote,
that should be changed. Should it stay as what it was voted on in 2007 or should it go back to
what it was? I'm going to guess I'm going to know what that vote will come back as because
people, it's getting to the point where the, we're all being cookie cuttered and you can't look at
every single property the same and that's basically what's being done here and so that's why
we're up here We're asking, look at our property It is special We are bordered by wetlands
on both sides. The only way our property is going to change when the sewer and water come in,
is if a developer comes in and buys us all out and grazes us all and the chances of that happening,
that's not actually for the City to decide. That's the market. The market's going to decide
because if it's there. If it's worth it then it will happen but otherwise us having an addition like
this is not going to change that at all And like I said if I wanted to decide to develop it, I'll just
take this structure and turn it into a home and there should be no issue with that. So with that, do
you have any questions?
Aller. I do.
Robert Boecker•. Yep
Aller I mean you said you read this thing about agricultural buildings and the zoning permits
Why didn't you go in and get a permit?
Robert Boecker Why didn't I go in and talk to them about a zoning permit?
Aller Any permit
Robert Boecker. Our plan was to go in and talk to them about it but we had already started the
process of trying to get all the numbers together of what this was going to mean for us to do this
project and we had a window to get in. We took it and we thought this would be no big deal and
it's obviously a big deal
Aller Okay. And then you said nobody asked you. I'll ask you, what do you do for a living?
Robert Boecker I am actually a reclaimed wood broker I buy reclaimed lumber Salvaged
lumber and I ship it all over the United States and I resale so I'm basically a wholesaler
Aller. Is it your intention to store that lumber on this property?
Robert Boecker. No. We ship directly from our site Wherever I source it at, we pay another
company to do the actual removal It gets prepped and then it gets shipped to the site So I do
have an in-home office that I work out of and that's where I do all my business
Al ler And then these other businesses, Boecker Properties, LLC.
Robert Boecker That is, when my wife used to be in mortgages and we owned multiple
investment properties and we put all our investment properties under our LLC so that LLC is
actually still sitting there. When the market tanked we sold those properties but it's sitting there
in case we ever decide to jump back Back into that.
Aller. And then Devaan-Sellers.
Robert Boecker Devaan-Sellers and
Al ler And Cheap Thrills
Robert Boecker Cheap Thrills is I collect motorcycles. I have multiple motorcycles and I have
two friends that actually have motorcycles and equipment at my house and we actually set those
up so that we could purchase parts because we can't just go in and get special pricing So they're
basically shell companies set up so that we can get the pricing that we want on the parts.
Aller So you're buying and selling parts out of your residence
Robert Boecker. No, we restore bikes So but that's not to say that parts don't get sold When I
restore a bike I'll sell it, everything off of it that I don't re-use so whether, if you look at that as a
business that I'm doing that for business purposes It's the same as if I'm working on truck.
Take a fender off. Put a new one on and put that fender on Craig's List Am I running a
business? So
Aller I would think so.
Robert Boecker. If I sell an old fender off of a truck that I fixed and I put it on Craig's List and
sold it9
Aller. It depends on how many you're selling.
Robert Boecker I'm doing that one truck so it's
Al ler Okay, so for that one part you're incorporating I mean that's what I'm having a hard
time.
Robert Boecker No, no, no, no, no
Aller Is that the Secretary of State lists these as working LLC's at your residence.
Robert Boecker As LLC's Correct and you need
Aller With the place of business listed as your residence and with a manager by the name of
Eric Devaan
Robert Boecker Yes, who is my friend who races and the whole, what I just said was that in
order to purchase parts at wholesale prices you need that entity set up. Otherwise they will not
set you up Those are set up for that reason so that we can purchase those parts
Aller. And the bikes that the parts go on are in your shed.
Robert Boecker A collection and raced, yes.
Aller Okay
Robert Boecker And crashed and replaced again
Aller. Alright. Any other questions from anyone else at this point?
Undestad. Just one here
Aller Sure
Undestad. Yeah, the four buildings, the out buildings you have, two of them are
Robert Boecker. The first building that they talked about, we don't have a garage attached to our
house so the first one is a detached, three car garage so as far as I'm concerned that's all,that's
our everyday driver cars
Undestad.. So that's number 1 up there9
Robert Boecker. Yeah Yeah, so that'd be number 1
Undestad. Okay.
Robert Boecker Yep Well we're doing the numbers so if you put up the other one with the
numbers that will be, there. So the number 1.
Undestad. Is your garage
Robert Boecker That's our regular garage and we park our cars in every day Number 2 is the
one that we are proposing to add onto and that's where you saw the pictures of the bigger doors
and the alone door is where I work on whatever equipment breaks down Whatever I'm working
on at the time The other bay next to it is where I store all motorcycles Everything that has to
do with that is in that spot The hoop house has my unrestored cars Unrestored snowmobiles.
No. That's the hoop house That's all the unrestored items that and extra stuff that I may need
because if that, you know if it collapses or whatever And then the next structure, if Bob goes to
that, that's where my nice products are. My nice cars and my motor coach too.
Undestad.. So you don't use any of these for agricultural right now? Four buildings
Robert Boecker No No, I can't grow on my land I can't do anything like that so, and when
they were permitted they were permitted for personal storage. Not as agricultural buildings.
This is the only one that we've applied for as an agricultural building
Undestad Okay.
Robert Boecker Anything else2
Aller Questions?
Hokkanen. Can you clarify the 10 acres zoning? What was that?
Aanenson That's for agricultural purposes. That's the farming component. I mean you can
have a horse stable on less than that
Hokkanen. That's what I thought.
Aanenson. So we do allow certain animals to be housed so for 10 acres would be if you had
something more, if you wanted sheep or something like that but to have a horse stable you can
have less than the 10 acres
Hokkanen. That's what I thought
Robert Boecker. I had just one more thing then. Along with Mark asking about the different
sheds Let's just take the property right next door to me Riegert who did get a variance
approved Let's say I bought their house It does have an attached two car garage and I decide I
want to have horses. So I put up a 1,000 square foot structure No big deal. That all goes
through Now my wife and I and my 2 kids are into snowmobihng We all go out and buy brand
new sleds Put them on our four place trailer. I cannot build a building to put that in. I cannot
put them in my horse structure My horses My horse trailer My feed is taking up that 1,000
square feet so I would live on 5 acres where I can have those 2 horses but I can't have anywhere
to put anything, if I have any type of hobby, there's nowhere for those items to go. Where does
staff suggest I put those?
Undestad. Can't that be in an attached though? Right I mean you can.
Aanenson Absolutely, if it's attached to the principle structure then it's not considered an
accessory structure Some people do have 5 car garages that are attached
Robert Boecker Well we're looking at the property right next door to me with, we're only 155
feet wide. There would be no room to add that on. That wouldn't work So if I attach this
structure instead of to the pole barn, if I attach it to my house, this would have been acceptable?
Aller. What are the setbacks?
Generous. If it's not an accessory structure, if it's part of the principle structure And then the
setbacks are 50 feet on the front
Robert Boecker. That's interesting. Obviously I'm not going to put horses attached to my house
but
Aanenson. And I'm not sure what the building code would be on that then too I'm assuming it
would be different standards for construction if it's attached to the principle structure
Robert Boecker But do you see how this is, obviously we're unique. Our area is unique. It
should be treated unique It shouldn't just be cookie cutter 1,000 square feet so Any other
questions?
Alley No Thank you
Robert Boecker Thank you
Aller. At this time I'll open the public hearing portion of the meeting. Anyone wishing to come
forward speaking for or against this item can do so at this time No one wishing to come
forward? No one coming forward, we're going to close the public hearing portion Oh Sir
come on up State your name and address for the record
Greg Falkner. Greg Falkner, 720 West 96th Street. Right down the road from the Boeckers
Aller. Welcome Mr Falkner
Greg Falkner Yes I have been here before you You may remember my case and you know it
is frustrating and stuff and I see where Bob's going with this I would like to say one thing and
that is, a lot of have been here before 2007 and these rules didn't apply at that time so it's really
hard for us to swallow it now and if you just understand that, it is different I mean if I had
known what I know now back then I may have made some different choices but you know we're
dealing with the 2007 as much as we can I'd like to say we are grandfathered in but clearly
we're not but I mean we did have different opinions of our property until this 2007 so you know
I understand where you're coming and I understand where Bob's coming but if you guys could
just give that a little bit of thought you know because it is real unique property When I found it
in '96, I mean I was ecstatic and I'm still ecstatic about it I love it It's a way of life for us you
know and I treat it well and everybody else on the street does too and we all get along very well
and I don't think that anybody has really made too many complaints in our neighborhood against
anybody in the neighborhood because I've never heard of anything and it is a dead end street but
you know I dust don't know if what Bob's proposing is really going to make a difference at this
point. If it is going to be turned into something different in the future where somebody buys us
p g g g Y Y
all out, which would be extremely difficult since I mean I just built my house 4 years ago. I have
a hard time believing that somebody's going to come in and give me what I want for it at this
point so And there is swamp on both sides There is swamp They're going to have to deal
with swamp because that is what's on both sides of the street so thank you.
Aller Thank you sir Anyone else wishing to speak either for or against the item? Seeing no
one come forward, close the public hearing. I'll open it for commissioner comments
Discussion
Aanenson Chair can I just add one thing9
Aller Yes
Aanenson This isn't Bob's position paper Bob wrote the staff report This is the staff's
recommendation so as a planning Community Development Director, I read this. The City
Manager reads the staff report so this is coming up through the staff's recommendation
Aller I think we all understand that.
Aanenson. Okay
Aller Thank you for pointing that out though for the public because they may not have realized
it at this point so with that we'll open it up for discussion. Comments. My first blush reaction
quite frankly was he didn't ask for permission He didn't ask for a permit Take it down I think
he made some valid arguments I think the community is interested in knowing where it goes so
I'd like to hear some discussion on those other factors to determine whether or not a variance
would be appropriate under these circumstances
Weick. When in doubt I tend to, and I am in doubt,but I do tend to go to the Findings of Fact as
a guide and to see are there any conditions of the variance that are met or are not met and they,
the Findings of Fact list 6 of those one doesn't apply. One is met and in my opinion four are not
under this, even with all the considerations and everything we've heard today and so that, I mean
that tends to guide my thinking when there's 4 of 6 that are not, that don't appear in my opinion
to be met for a variance.
Alley Any other comments9
Hokkanen I do want to point out, these are very unique properties and I do feel, I understand
their frustration I understand the whole 2007 change. I wasn't here at that time so I can't
comment on that but if you purchase your home or your property with certain expectations you
think that's going to go through for the whole time that you own your property no matter what
that case may be so I understand that frustration on that part. How it applies in this particular
situation I kind of agree we're missing some components here Just my but I do understand their
frustration and it is a very unique area
Aller I agree
Hokkanen. Of the city I mean it's, that's part of what makes Chanhassen a great place to live
Aller And this isn't the first one in this area that we've had to deal with
Hokkanen. No No
Aller Just on a much smaller scale where people were looking just to expand by a couple
hundred feet here and there.
Hokkanen. Right
Aller And to expand an already existing use as opposed to creating a new use.
Hokkanen. I agree with that, yeah
Aller. Any additional comments? Questions Concerns
Undestad• Yeah I don't know. I'm kind of in the same boat is how do you pick and choose?
You know I mean yeah, it's tough because again it's, if you've got acreage you want to do that
kind of stuff but you know, I don't know how we can pluck one out here and say yes and one
here and say no and you know at what point does, and again we talked about this before Getting
all these buildings going up at the same time so, you know and I think that if we had somebody
here that didn't have any buildings on there and everybody else did, well then we look at the one
in there Four buildings, he's got a lot of square footage on there and none of them are for
agricultural right now but I guess I'd have to agree with the Findings of Fact on this too.
Campion I had one question That building number 4 The one where we, there wasn't a
history of the permit When was that built?
Robert Boecker. 2006. And it does meet setbacks
Aller Further?
Yusuf I just have one question
Aller. Sure.
Yusuf We understand your hardship and the situation that you're faced with I'm just
wondenng whether staff has made any recommendations or alternate proposals that might help
to fit the need or is there a way to maximize the use of the existing structure so you could
accomplish your goal without the add on?
Generous Commissioner. No, we didn't recommend any alternatives if you will We did ask if
he could use the existing structures for his stable
Yusuf And the response was?
Generous. Was no, he wanted to keep it separate with the hay and other critters possibly getting
into it and so he has a separate unit if you will for that operation.
Aller Which is I think what his testimony was and I think it's a very understandable one If
you're rebuilding and creating things then you don't necessarily want mice and other things
going into your component so I think the big question is, does it meet the requirements of the
variance and does it fulfill any of the exemptions for purposes of agricultural use.
Tennyson It doesn't meet the requirements of a variance in general That's the problem
Robert Boecker Could you read those out?
Tennyson I'm referring to the same, same information that Commissioner Weick was talking
about The six things in the Findings of Fact starting on page 1 of Findings of Fact and going(a)
through(1). Those are the legal requirements. Trying to find a Finding that meets those legal
requirements of a variance including practical difficulties which is sometimes called a hardship
And the one that didn't apply was related to earth sheltered construction These Findings are
what we need to go to when we try to look at a variance. Does it meet the requirements of the
variance because a variance is a really unique thing itself Even though the property is unique,
so is a variance and that's the problem for us.
Robert Boecker Can I just, I guess I'd have to say the uniqueness as we talk to the property I
believe also makes it that much tougher for Findings to support you know doing what we're
looking to do in our area I don't want to be on your side either Trying to figure out a why As
residents purchasing in 1997, purchased under a certain assumption that this is where I'm going
to grow up. This is probably where I'll retire and when I sell this house I'm probably going to
Florida and that's changed now and really I had no way to not let, it happened 2007 happened
Even if you had mailed each one of us, I don't know for sure you know what the outcome I
guess none of us would have known but I think it's to the point now where too many things. As
you say there's more and more of this coming up and this happening where it should be pointing
out that you know, this is actually a problem. What was done in 2007, maybe we shouldn't have
cookie cuttered everything and just treat, and just say everything has to match this because we
are Chanhassen We are unique and there's a reason that we want to keep and have all these
areas. I believe having us looking the same in 2030 and our neighborhood look the way it does
now,the way we keep it would be great But I don't think staff agrees
Aller Any additional comments9
Undestad. Well I mean just to comment on that. You know I think part of the, when we go
through rezoning and then we look at these comp plans and things like that Now as the city
grows it does change and it does need to have changes made and the only way that we can put
those out is in the newspaper. Public notifications and things and that's when we need
everybody to come back in and say, wait a minute I'm not sure I like that If everybody, if they
don't read the paper they don't get the notice Maybe the neighbors don't tell them but it's really
our only way of getting that out there And that's why we do the publications so changes have to
be made. We send them out and you know when we adjust a zoning it gets adjusted and that's
what we've got to live with for a while here so
Aller Anything further'? I'll entertain a motion
Weick. I will.
Alter. Commissioner Weick
Weick The Planning Commission denies the variance request Direct the applicant to demolish
the horse shelter, quote unquote, expansion and adopt the attached Findings of Fact and
Decision
Aller. I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Tennyson. I'll second
Aller I have a motion and a second Any further discussion9
Weick moved, Tennyson seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission acting as the
Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies the accessory structure variance request, directs
the demolition of the "horse shelter" expansion and adopts the attached Findings of Fact
and Decision. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
Page 1 of 2
From Bob Boecker [bob @boeckerbiz corn]
Sent. Monday, November 24, 2014 8 30 PM
To Generous, Bob
Subject. RE. Appeal
Yes, we are willing to Waive the city's review period until February 23rd, 2015
From: Generous, Bob [mailto bgenerous @ci chanhassen mn us]
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 2.17 PM
To: bob @boeckerbiz corn
Cc: Aanenson, Kate; Ingvalson, Drew
Subject: FW Appeal
Robert,
Could you also waive the City's review period to the February 23, 2015 City Council meeting? Otherwise, we
need to make a final decision by December 16, 2014
Thank you
Robert Generous, AICP
Senior Planner
7700 Market Boulevard
P 0 Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(952) 227-1131
bgenerous @ci chanhassen mn us
Chanhassen is a Community for Life—
Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow
From: Aanenson, Kate
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 2 11 PM
To: Generous, Bob
Subject: FW Appeal
From Bob Boecker [mailto:bob @boeckerbiz corn]
Sent. Monday, November 24, 2014 12 30 PM
To Aanenson, Kate
Subject.Appeal
Kate, Robert, Drew,
We would like to appeal the Planning Commission decision regarding our variance request, case 2014-33 Please
schedule this appeal to appear in front of the City Council on February 23rd Please reply to this e-mail to
confirm we are scheduled.
file•///G•/PLAN/2014%20Planning%20Cases/2014-33%20610%20West%2096th%20Stree 2/13/2015
Page 2 of 2
Robert &Christin Boecker
610 West 96th Street
Chanhassen, MN 55317
11/24/2014
file.///G./PLAN/2014%20Plannmg%20Cases/2014-33%20610%20West%2096th%20Stree... 2/13/2015
0Chapin Hall Attorney The Commons Minnetonka,Suite 204 952 200 9407
14451 Highway 7 chapin @mchapinhall corn
I care I can help I get results Minnetonka,MN 55345 mchapinhall corn
February 13, 2015 VIA EMAIL council @ci chanhassen mn.us
Mayor Denny Laufenburger
Bethany Tjornhom
Jerry McDonald
Elise Ryan
Dan Campion
Re: Robert and Christin Boecker
610 West 96.Street
CCL File No 1233 001
Dear Mayor Laufenburger and Chanhassen City Council:
Chapin Consulting, LLC represents Robert and Christin Boecker regarding their variance
request at 610 West 96.Street
The Boeckers' variance request is currently scheduled on the City Council Agenda for
Monday, February 23, 2015, as item 2, under G. NEW BUSINESS
2. 610 West 96th Street: Request for Variance for an Accessory Structure in Excess of
1,000 sq ft on approximately 4 5 Acres zoned Agricultural Estate (A-2),
Applicant/Owner Robert and Christin Boecker
Virtually identical variances have been approved for neighboring property. Most recently,
on January 20, 2015, the Planning Commission approved:
750 West 96th Street-Planning Case 2015-02
Request for a Variance for an accessory structure in excess of 1,000 square feet on
approximately 2.5 acres of property zoned Agricultural Estate (A2) and located at 750
West 96th Street. Applicant. Carissa &Steve Haverly
Tennyson moved, Hokkanen seconded, that the Chanhassen Planning Commission,
acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments, approves Planning Case #2015-02 for
a 1,440 square foot stable for a total area variance of 507 square feet, subject to the
usual conditions and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Decision.
On February 9, 2015, you accepted the variance as part of Agenda item D, CONSENT
AGENDA
2. Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated January 20,2015
There is a long history of approving the kind of variance sought by Robert and Christen
Boecker, including.
• December 10, 2012
o A2 variance for accessory structure requested by Greg and Tammy Falconer,
720 West 96th Street. Tjornhom moved, McDonald seconded, and Council
approved 5-0 the variance to expand 520 square feet of non-conforming space
• October 8, 2012
o A2 variance for accessory structure requested by Greg, Andrew, and Shannon
Reigert 620 West 96th Street. McDonald moved, Ernst seconded, and Council
approved 5-0 the variance to allow 2560 square foot non-conforming accessory
building
Another way to resolve this ongoing issue would be to approve an amendment to Section 20-
904. -Accessory structures. A proposed amendment is attached to this letter.
I look forward to meeting with you next week before the February 23, 2015 City Council
meeting Please advise of your availability
Thank you.
Sincerely,
ea"
M Chapin Hall
Attorney
Chapin Consulting, LLC
MCH/wbf
cc Robert and Christen Boecker
• Sec.20-904. -Accessory structures.
(a) A detached accessory structure, except a dock, shall be located in the buildable
lot area or required rear yard. No accessory use or structure in any residential district
shall be located in any required front, side or rear setback with the following exceptions:
(1)In the A2 with lots less than four acres, RR, RSF, RLM and R4 districts accessory
structures shall not exceed 1,000 square feet In the RSF, RLM and R4 districts these
structures may encroach into the rear setback as follows
a Less than 140 square feet, minimum rear setback is five feet
b One hundred forty-one to 399 square feet, minimum rear setback is ten feet
c Four hundred square feet and above, minimum rear setback is 30 feet, except in
the RLM district where the minimum rear setback is 25 feet
(2)In the A2 district, with lots fours acres or larger, accessory structures may not
occupy more than 20 percent of the yard in which it is built
(2) (3)On riparian lots, detached garages and storage buildings may be located in the
front or rear yard but must comply with front, side and applicable ordinary high water
mark setbacks and may not occupy more than 30 percent of the yard in which it is built
(3) (4) Tennis courts and swimming pools may be located in rear yards with a
minimum side and rear yard setback of ten feet,but must comply with applicable
ordinary high water mark setbacks