2016-06 Findings of FactCITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
IN RE:
Application of Ryan and Carolyn Majkrzak for a variance from the maximum fence height of three
feet six inches for fences within the 75 -foot shoreland setback on property zoned Single -Family
Residential District (RSF) — Planning Case 2016-06.
On March 15, 2016, 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 Single -Family Residential District (RSF).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density.
3. The legal description of the property is as follows:
Section 24 Township 116 Range 023 ALL THAT P/O GOVT LOT 2 24-116-23 LYING
SE OF CENTERLINE OF LYMAN BOULEVARD PER DOC T90333 & 189939.
CENTERLINE OF LYMAN BOULEVARD DESC AS: BEG AT W QUARTER
CORNER OF SECT 24, TH S89*E WHERE E/W QUARTER LINE BEARS S89*E
2186.62; TH ELY 28' ALONG TANGENTIAL CURVE
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 Single -Family Residential District. The purpose of the
request is to construct a 175 -foot long, 6 -foot 6 -inch tall privacy fence along Lyman
Boulevard. The shoreline fence section of city code is meant to protect the views of, and
from the lake. The variance request is not from the lake proper, but rather from the inlet
channel into Lake Riley. If the lake inlet did not exist, the fence would be permitted
without a variance. It is not the intent of this chapter to protect the views of and from
lake inlets, but rather to protect the views of and from lakes. As the proposed fence is
located over 75 feet from the lake proper, the construction of the fence will be in keeping
with the general purpose and intent of this chapter.
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: The practical difficulty of complying with the maximum fence height for
fences within the 75 -foot shoreland setback is created by a lake inlet located on the
subject property. The maximum fence height requirement created by the lake inlet
eliminates the opportunity for the property owner to construct a functional privacy fence
between their rear yard and Lyman Boulevard, a busy arterial road. The property owner
is requesting the variance for the fence to decrease noise caused by vehicle traffic on
Lyman Boulevard, reduce light caused by vehicle traffic on Lyman Boulevard, and
prevent people from trespassing across their property to access Lake Riley. It is clear that
westbound traffic on Lyman Boulevard could potentially impact the repose and comfort
of the applicant in their rear yard. Requesting a variance for a privacy fence is a
reasonable request and the proposed fence should remedy the issues currently
experienced by the applicant.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The intent of the request is not based upon economic considerations alone. The
applicant has stated that the fence height variance request is to decrease noise caused by
vehicle traffic on Lyman Boulevard, reduce light caused by vehicle traffic on Lyman
Boulevard, and prevent people from trespassing across their property to access Lake
Riley.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The difficulty of complying with the maximum fence height is due to the lake
inlet on the property. This circumstance is unique to the property and was not created by
the landowner. Generally, property owners are permitted privacy fences in their side and
rear yards.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: The construction of the proposed fence will minimally reduce the visibility of
the lake from Lyman Boulevard., but the proposed fence will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood. The view of the lake from Lyman Boulevard is already
obstructed by thick vegetation and the construction of a fence will not cause a major
change to the character of the area.
2
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 #2016-06, dated March 15, 2016, prepared by Drew Ingvalson, et al,
is incorporated herein.
DECISION
"The Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustment,
approves a three-foot fence height variance for a six-foot six-inch tall, 175 -foot long fence in the
shoreland setback as shown in Attachment 6 of the staff report, on property zoned Single -Family
Residential District, subject to the following conditions:
1. A gate, at least 14 feet in width, is included with the fence and placed so that City will
have convenient access to the outfall should maintenance be required.
2. The applicant applies for and receives a zoning permit.
3. The applicant applies for and receives an encroachment agreement from the City."
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 15a' day of March, 2016.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY: �/'
Chairman