Loading...
PC Staff Report 18-01PROPOSED MOTION: "The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves an 11.5 -foot front yard setback, a 22.1 -foot lakeshore setback, and an 11 percent lot coverage variance, subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decisions." (Note: A motion for denial and appropriate findings of fact are also included at the end of the report.) SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is demolishing a nonconforming single-family home and is requesting a variance to construct a new single-family residence on the property. The existing use encroaches 22.1 feet into the required shoreland setback, has a shed that encroaches approximately 6 feet into the side yard setback, and has 36.36 percent lot coverage. The proposed house would maintain the existing lake setback, meet the required side yard setbacks, reduce lot coverage to 36 percent, and require an 11.5 -foot front yard setback variance. LOCATION: 3617 Red Cedar Point Rd (PID 256600320) APPLICANT: Todd and Kristin Jackson 621 Broken Arrow Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 OWNER: Patricia Souba 110980 Von Hertzen Cir Chaska, MN 55318 PRESENT ZONING: RSF 2030 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density ACREAGE: .23 acres DENSITY: NA 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 Planning Commission 3617 Red Cedar Point Road — Planning Case 2018-01 January 2, 2018 Page 2 of 11 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 PROPOSAUSUMMARY The parcel's existing house is over 90 years old, does not meet the city's minimum standards for single-family dwellings, and is in disrepair. This structure is located 52.9 feet from the lake's ordinary high water setback and the lot currently has 36.36 percent lot coverage, largely due to the fact that the front portion of the lot is covered by gravel parking area. The applicant is proposing replacing the existing structure with a modern home. In order to this they are requesting a variance to formalize the existing 22.1 -foot encroachment into the required shoreland setback. They are also proposing to remove the gravel parking area, a shed located within the western side yard setback, an outdoor fireplace area, and a concrete walkway in the rear yard to bring the property more in line with City Code. Removing the shed will bring the property's side yard setback into compliance with City Code. The lot coverage proposed for the new home, driveway, and patio area would require an 11 percent lot coverage variance, a .36 percent reduction from the existing condition. They are also requesting an 11.5 -foot front yard setback variance; since they believe the parcel's size and existing lake setback make it impractical to construct a house and garage while meeting the property's 30 foot front yard setback. The applicant has stated that they believe the requested variances are in line with those granted by the city in similar circumstances, and they have noted that many properties in the neighborhoods have structures with similar or small front yard setbacks. They believe the proposed house will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood, and feel that replacing much of the existing gravel frontage with vegetation will improve the property's aesthetics. Planning Commission 3617 Red Cedar Point Road — Planning Case 2018-01 January 2, 2018 Page 3ofII APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 1, General Provisions Section 1-2, Rules of Construction and Definitions Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances Chapter 20, Article II, Division 4, Nonconforming Uses Chapter 20, Article Vii. Shoreland Management District Chapter 20, Article XII. "RSF" Single-family residential district Section 20-615. Lot requirements and setbacks. BACKGROUND County records indicate that the existing structure was built in 1927. The city does not have a building file for this property, nor does it have any records of any permits associated with this address. Throughout the second half of 2017 staff received numerous inquiries from interested parties about 3617 Red Cedar Point Road. Staff informed individuals interested in the property that a variance would be likely be required to rebuild on the property. Staff indicated that any variance request should maintaining the existing shoreland setback and reduce the amount of lot coverage present on the parcel. Staff indicated that it would consider supporting a front yard variance in the interest of maintain the existing lake setback, but expressed concerns about the ability of a shortened driveway to provide onsite parking. Additionally, staff expressed reservations about the property's ability to accommodate a three -car garage, recommending that a tuck under or side loading configuration be used. SITE CONDITIONS The property is zoned Single -Family Residential and is located within the city's Shoreland Management District. This zoning district requires lots to be a minimum of 20,000 square feet, have front yard setbacks of 30 feet, rear yard setbacks of 75 feet from the lake's ordinary high water level, side yard setbacks of 10 feet, and limits parcels to a maximum of 25 percent lot coverage. Residential structures are limited to 35 feet in height. The lot is 9,222 square feet, and currently has 3,353 square feet of impervious surface resulting in 36.36 percent lot coverage. The existing structure meets the 30 -foot front yard setback and 10 - foot east side setback, has a shed located approximately four feet from the west side lot line, and is setback 52.9 feet from the lake's ordinary high water mark. The rear yard also has a 114 square foot fireplace/patio area setback 24 feet from the lake. Note: A portion of the parcel, 543 square feet, is covered by Red Cedar Point Road which is a public street. This area is not included in the lot area or lot coverage totals above. Planning Commission 3617 Red Cedar Point Road — Planning Case 2018-01 January 2, 2018 Page 4 of 11 NEIGHBORHOOD Red Cedar Point The plat for this area was recorded in August of 1913. Over the subsequent century the City of Chanhassen was formed, a zoning code was passed, the zoning code was amended numerous times, and buildings were built, demolished, and rebuilt to meet the standards and needs of the existing ordinances. Additionally, the neighborhood's roads were not always constructed within their designated right of way. In some areas, this has led to portions of buildings being located in the right of way and portions of these roads being located within residents' property lines. Very few properties in the area meet the requirements of the city's zoning code, and most properties either are non -conforming uses or are operating under a variance. Variances within 500 feet: 78-07 3637 South Cedar Drive: Approved- 19' front setback (garage) 80-08 3629 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved- 12' front setback, 3' foot side setback, +1.5' side setback for (chimney), 20' lot width, 40' lot frontage, 13,000 square feet lot area (house) 81-08 3607 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved- 13.5' lake setback (deck) 83-09 3613 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved- 12' front setback, 2' side setback, 7' lake setback (house) 84-18 3707 South Cedar Drive: Approved- 20' front setback (detached garage) 85-20 3624 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved- 1.2' front setback, 4.8' side setback (detached garage) 85-27 3701 South Cedar Drive: Approved: 5' front setback, 35' lake setback (house) 87-13 3629 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved: 12' front setback, 3' side (house) Planning Commission 3617 Red Cedar Point Road — Planning Case 2018-01 January 2, 2018 Page 5 of 11 88-113605 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved- 4' E side setback, 2' W side setback, 26' lake setback (garage, addition intensifying non -conforming) 92-013607 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved- 1.5' side setback, 14.5' lake setback (addition expanding non -conforming) 93-06 3618 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved- 8' side setback, 15' lake setback (deck and porch) 96-04 3705 South Cedar Drive: Approved- 3' side setback, 31' lake setback, 25% LC (house) 02-05 3628 Hickory Rd: Approved- 13' front setback (Hickory), 2' front setback (Red Cedar Point), 5' side setback (detached garage) 04-07 3637 South Cedar Drive: Approved- 19.25' front setback, 4' lake setback, 15% LC (addition) 06-04 3633 South Cedar Drive: Approved- 22.5' front setback, 15.8' front setback, 2.39% LC (garage) 08-04 3637 South Cedar Drive: Approved- 20.2' front setback, 8' side setback (house) 09-15 3625 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved- 15.5' front setback, 6.5' E side setback, 9' driveway setback, 18.5' lake setback, 12.3% LC, allow one car garage (house) 15-07 3701 South Cedar Drive: Approved- increase existing non -conformity (enclose deck 15' in lake setback) 15-14 3603 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved- 20.2' front setback, 17' lake setback (two-story attached garage) 16-11 3627 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved- 13.6' lake setback, 4.8% LC (home) 17-09 3622 Red Cedar Point Rd: Approved- Intensify non -conforming by raising garage in side yard setback (garage) ANALYSIS Front Yard Setback The property's existing structure meets the RSF district's 30 -foot front yard setback; however, the proposed house would be setback 18.5 -feet from the front lot line, requiring an 11.5 -foot front yard variance. The city requires front yard setbacks in order to ensure the presence of front yard green space, preserve the character of its single-family residential districts, and to provide for off street parking. Planning Commission 3617 Red Cedar Point Road — Planning Case 2018-01 January 2, 2018 Page 6 of 11 The property's front yard is currently covered by 2,105 -square foot gravel parking area that runs the entire length of the property and extents past the property's 30 -foot front yard setback. While the proposed house's expanded foot print and driveway will occupy about half of the space currently covered by gravel, the other half will be replaced with vegetation. Converting the gravel are to green space will represent an improvement to the property's aesthetic. The applicant is requesting a reduced front yard setback because they feel that it is not possible to fit a modern house and garage on a substandard lot while maintaining the existing shoreland setback without relief from the front yard setback. Given the lot's average depth of 122 feet, if the applicant maintained the existing shoreland and front yard setback they would be restricted to combined home and garage depth of approximately 39 feet. The proposed house and garage have a maximum depth of 47 feet and minimum depth of approximately 41 feet. The applicant has stated that it is not practical to construct a shallower house, due to the proposed home's tuck under garage. The applicant chose to propose a tuck under configuration based upon staff recommendation and preference for a front yard variance as opposed to the side yard variances that would be required for other attached garage configurations. The applicant's proposed front yard setback of 18.5 feet is consistent with a line drawn across the front of the property connecting the comers of the adjacent homes. When examining properties within 500 feet of 3617 Red Cedar Point Road, staff found that 13 of the 9.19 _• VV �oarin " aS ; hms 5/.7 a :'„-L ».K ~• /. N 9507 1-- lao �� 10.0tftIN - U . It� aA riaw � n o L } z1 z1 w 950. 99/.9 x 990.P g 950.4 950—'—� 6 bd 919.4 N 9 9199p0 %aR 9M.1 II .0 916.3-- � /* 996z I s16.0 - Svrvay_,s^Bti,?A,ra�„- 80.00 6_--- x -_--- x _- -- - -91-� 911.9 9119 25 properties have received a variance from the required front yard setback. As the table below shows, six of those properties were allowed front yard setbacks of less than 11 feet, and a further four variances were granted allowing front yard setbacks of between 14 and 18 feet. Additionally, the neighborhood has numerous nonconforming properties with similarly short front yard setbacks. The request 18.5 -foot front yard setback is in line what is present in this neighborhood. Planning Commission 3617 Red Cedar Point Road — Planning Case 2018-01 January 2, 2018 Page 7 of 11 Front Yard Setback Variances Granted with 500' of 3617 Red Cedar Point Road Closest Structure Front Yard Variance Distance from lot line Garage 1.2 feet 28.8 feet Garage 2 feet 28 feet House 5 feet 25 feet House 12 feet 18 feet House 12 feet 18 feet House 12 feet 18 feet House 15.5 feet 14.5 feet Garage 19 feet 11 feet Addition(Home) 19.25 feet 10.75 feet Garage 20 feet 10 feet House 20.2 feet 9.8 feet House 20.2 feet 9.8 feet Garage 22.5 feet 7.5 feet The final consideration in considering an appropriate front yard setback is the ability of driveway to provide for off street parking. The impact that the reduced front yard setback has on this is amplified by the fact that Red Cedar Point Road encroaches between 8.29 and 8.63 feet onto the applicant's property resulting in a driveway that is approximately 10 feet long at its shortest point and about 16 feet long at its longest. Staff is concerned that the short driveway length will not facilitate off street parking, but acknowledges that many properties in the area have comparably short driveways. Lot Coverage The city's requires a minimum lot area of 20,000 square feet for riparian properties and limits these properties to 25 percent lot coverage. The applicant's lot is substandard with a lot area of 9,222 square feet. The property currently has a lot coverage of 36.36 percent, or 3,353 square feet. When owners propose improvements to properties that have nonconforming lot coverage, the policy is that the existing nonconformity must be reduced; however, there is no formal rule stating how much of a reduction must occur. In this case, the owner is proposing to reduce the property's existing lot coverage by 34 square feet, a .36 percent reduction. When considering what lot coverage is appropriate, both the percentage of lot coverage compared to the district's standard and the absolute square footage of lot coverage present on the property should be considered. A non -riparian lot M Road - Proposed L.C, - Removed LC Planning Commission 3617 Red Cedar Point Road — Planning Case 2018-01 January 2, 2018 Page 8 of 11 meeting the RSF district's 15,000 square -foot minimum is allowed up to 3,750 square feet of impervious surface. Lots zoned residential low and medium density and meeting the minimum size of 9,000 square feet are entitled to up to 3,150 square feet of lot coverage. These totals provide an indication of what the city considers to be reasonable minimum maximums for single-family residential lot coverage. The 3,319 square feet proposed by the applicant is roughly between those totals; however, the city has limited lot coverage to totals below those thresholds, especially in areas with stormwater management issues or which are adjacent to water resources. In evaluating these requests staff looks at the extent to which the proposed amount of lot coverage and any associated stormwater best management practices will represent an improvement to property's existing conditions. A 34 square -foot reduction in the property's lot coverage is not in and of itself a meaningful improvement to the property's existing conditions, and if no other measures are taken to reduce impervious surface or improve stormwater management staff does not recommend approving the variance with the proposed lot coverage. Staff believes that the applicant can improve the property's stormwater management while retaining the proposed lot coverage by utilizing permeable pavers for the proposed driveway and patio, by installing a 20 feet buffer along the lake, and by working with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed to identify and implement a shoreline restoration project to improve ecosystem health and function. Staff recommends that if a variance for the proposed lot coverage is granted, the three aforementioned items be made conditions of approval. Shoreland Setback The city's shoreland overlay district requires a 75 -foot setback for properties located along Lake Minnewashta; however, the existing primary structure has a 52.9 -foot setback from the lake. Since the applicant is proposing demolishing the existing structure and building wider structure within the lake setback, a variance is required. Due to the fact that the property has an average depth of 122 feet, requiring the new home to meet the 75 -foot shoreland setback would provide the applicant with a very constrained buildable area. These situations are fairly common in the city's older lakeside neighborhoods, and the city's practice has generally been to use the property's existing lake setback to determine what shoreland setback is reasonable. Within 500 feet of the property shoreland setback variances of up to 35 feet have been granted to facilitate the construction of homes, and a total f thrh 1 d - 88t•SOfO•E>S A9 -.. 3' z o ee s ore an setbacks variances of over 20 feet have been issued. The properties to the East and West of the parcel have respective lake setbacks of 54.6 feet and 61.4 feet. The proposed lake setback of 52.9 feet is line with city precedent and similar to the setback maintained by the adjacent properties. Planning Commission 3617 Red Cedar Point Road — Planning Case 2018-01 January 2, 2018 Page 9 of 11 Staff is concerned that significantly increasing the size of the structure and amount of impervious surface within the shoreland setback will increase the amount of stormwater runoff being diverted into Lake Minnewashta. Staff believes that requiring the rear patio discussed below to be constructed using permeable pavers and requiring the installation of a 20 -foot buffer between the home and the lake will serve to mitigate this impact. The applicant is also proposing a rear patio which will be setback approximately 41 feet from the lake. Since the City Code allows for lakefront properties to have one water oriented accessory structure of up to 250 square feet with a minimum setback of 10 -feet from the lake's ordinary high water level, no variance is required for the patio's encroachment into the shoreland setback. The applicant has agreed that the patio will be the property's only water oriented accessory structure, and will be removing the existing fireplace area which is setback approximately 24 feet from the lake. Impact on Neighborhood Red Cedar Point is one of the oldest neighborhoods in the city. Many of its properties are non- conforming uses, and 16 of the 25 properties within 500 feet of 3617 Red Cedar Point Rd have been granted at least one variance. Of these 16 properties, 13 have a variance are for reduced front yard setbacks, five have been granted addition lot coverage, and 11 were permitted a reduced shoreland setback. Many of the nine properties which do not have a variances also have nonconforming lot coverage, front yard setbacks, and shoreland setbacks. The height of the proposed house is higher than that of surrounding properties, but it does meet the guidelines established by the City Code. The existing housing stock is a mix between older single level homes and more recent two-story homes. Due to the unique constraints posed by each lot and the changes in architectural trends over the decades, the housing in this area is a fairly eclectic mix. SUMMARY The applicant's proposed shoreland setback maintains the existing distance to the lake and granting it would be consistent with how similar requests have been treated in the past. The Planning Commission 3617 Red Cedar Point Road — Planning Case 2018-01 January 2, 2018 Page 10 of 11 requested lot coverage variance represents a very minimal reduction of an existing nonconformity, but if pervious pavers are utilized and a buffer is installed along the lake, the property's stormwater management will be significantly improved. The proposed front yard setback will result in a very short driveway and a limited ability to accommodate onsite parking, but it is consistent with the surrounding properties and what has historically be allowed within the neighborhood. Staff recommends approval of the proposed variances with conditions. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approves an 11.5 -foot front yard setback, a 22.1 -foot lakeshore setback, and an 11 percent lot coverage variance, subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decisions: 1. The applicant must apply for and receive a building permit. 2. A title search for the property should be conducted to ensure any/all existing easements are documented 3. A new 1" = 20' scale survey should be provided as part of the building permit application clearly showing the propose setbacks and lot coverage for the proposed house and structures. 4. At least one tree must be planted in front yard, if one is not present after construction. 5. Tree protection fencing must be properly installed at the edge of the grading limits across the entire south side. This must be done prior to any construction activities and remain installed until all construction is completed. Any trees lost to construction activities beyond those indicated in the tree removal plan shall be replaced. 6. No equipment may be stored within the tree protection area. 7. Appropriate tree protection measures must be taken to protect the rear yard ash from EAB. 8. The 162 square foot rear patio area is understood to be the property's water oriented structure. 9. Lot coverage may not exceed 3,319 square feet. 10. The proposed rear patio and driveway areas must be constructed using pervious paver systems. 11. A permanent 20 -foot native vegetated buffer must be installed along the shoreline using species native to the ecotype with permanent buffer monuments. The buffer may work around the path and stairs. The buffer must be designed and installed by an experienced professional in native shoreline restoration. Design plan must be approved by the Water Resources Coordinator. 12. The property owner must work with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to identify and implement any shoreline restoration projects that would improve ecosystem health and function. Replace riprap with bioengineering solutions is one example. Planning Commission 3617 Red Cedar Point Road — Planning Case 2018-01 January 2, 2018 Page 11 of 11 Should the Planning Commission deny the variance request, it is recommended that the planning Commission adopt the following motion and attached Finding of Fact and Decision: "The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies a variance request to allow an 11.5 - foot front yard setback, a 22.1 -foot lakeshore setback, and an 11 percent lot coverage variance, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decisions." ATTACHMENTS 1. Finding of Fact and Decision Approval 2. Finding of Fact and Decision Denial 3. Development Review Application 4. Tree Removal Plan 5. WRC Memo on 3617 Red Cedar Point 6. ERS Memo on 3617 Red Cedar Point 7. ENG Memo on 3617 Red Cedar Point 8. Public Hearing Notice Mailing List 9. Notes of Resident's Concerns 10. Variance Document 6:\PLAN\2018 Planning Cases\18-01 - 3617 Red Cedar Point Road - VAR\Staff Report -3617 Red Cedar Point Rd_PC.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION (APPROVAL) IN RE: Application of Todd and Kristin Jackson for an 11.5 -foot front yard setback, a 22.1 -foot lakeshore setback, and an 11 percent lot coverage variance on a property zoned Single Family Residential District (RSF) - Planning Case 2018-01 On January 2, 2018 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: Lot 9, Block 4, Red Cedar Point Lake Minnewashta 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 intent of the city's shoreland management ordinance is to protect the city's aquatic resources by requiring structures to be setback 75 feet from lakes and limiting the maximum lot coverage permitted within 1,000 feet of a lake to 25 percent. The setback and lot coverage limitation is designed to minimize the amount of stormwater runoff that is discharged into the lake. The applicant's proposal calls for maintaining the existing nonconforming lake setback and slightly reducing the existing lot coverage. Staff believes that by using pervious pavers, installing a vegetative buffer, and working with the watershed district to conduct a shoreline restoration project the proposed home's impact on Lake Minnewashta will be minimized. Given the existing nonconforming nature of the property and the BMPs being required as conditions of approval for the variance, staff believes that the applicant's proposal balances protecting the lake and allowing for reasonable use on a nonconforming property. The city's zoning code requires a minimum front yard setback of 30 feet in order to provide for greenspace and a consistent neighborhood aesthetic. The applicant's proposed reduction the front yard setback is in conjunction with the removal of an existing driveway that occupies most of the front yard and is similar to the front yard setback maintained by other homes in the neighborhood. For these reasons, the requested front yard setback in harmony with the chapter's intent of providing for greenspace and a consistent neighborhood aesthetic. 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 lot's substandard size combined with the required front and lake setbacks mean a reasonably sized home could not be constructed on the property without a variance. c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: The property is located in an older subdivision and the existing structure does not conform to the current zoning code. The parcel is significantly smaller than the minimum size required for riparian lots zoned RSF. The substandard nature of the lot makes it impossible to construct a single-family home meeting the current zoning code. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The property is located in one of the city's oldest subdivisions. The vast majority of the properties within 500 feet of the parcel either have received variances or are nonconforming uses. The existing housing stock is a mix between older single level homes and more recent two-story homes. Due to the unique constraints posed by each lot and the changes in architectural trends over the decades, the housing in this area is a fairly eclectic mix. 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 #2018-01, dated January 2, 2018, prepared by MacKenzie Walters, is incorporated herein. 2 DECISION "The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves an 11.5 -foot front yard setback, a 22.1 -foot lakeshore setback, and an 11 percent lot coverage variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant must apply for and receive a building permit. 2. A title search for the property should be conducted to ensure any/all existing easements are documented 3. A new 1" = 20' scale survey should be provided as part of the building permit application clearly showing the propose setbacks and lot coverage for the proposed house and structures. 4. At least one tree must be planted in front yard, if one is not present after construction. 5. Tree protection fencing must be properly installed at the edge of the grading limits across the entire south side. This must be done prior to any construction activities and remain installed until all construction is completed. Any trees lost to construction activities beyond those indicated in the tree removal plan shall be replaced. 6. No equipment may be stored within the tree protection area. 7. Appropriate tree protection measures must be taken to protect the rear yard ash from EAB. 8. The 162 square foot rear patio area is understood to be the property's water oriented structure. 9. Lot coverage may not exceed 3,319 square feet. 10. The proposed rear patio and driveway areas must be constructed using pervious paver systems. 11. A permanent 20' native vegetated buffer must be installed along the shoreline using species native to the ecotype with permanent buffer monuments. The buffer may work around the path and stairs. The buffer must be designed and installed by an experienced professional in native shoreline restoration. Design plan must be approved by the Water Resources Coordinator. 12. The property owner must work with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to identify and implement any shoreline restoration projects that would improve ecosystem health and function. Replace riprap with bioengineering solutions is one example. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 2nd day of January, 2018. CITY OF CHANHASSEN Andrew Aller - Chairman CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION (DENIAL) IN RE: Application of Todd and Kristin Jackson for an 11.5 -foot front yard setback, a 22.1 -foot lakeshore setback, and an 11 percent lot coverage variance on a property zoned Single Family Residential District (RSF) - Planning Case 2018-01 On January 2, 2018 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: Lot 9, Block 4, Red Cedar Point Lake Minnewashta 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 zoning code's shoreland overlay district was enacted to protect the city's aquatic resources. Allowing the applicant to exceed the districts 25 percent lot coverage limit and increase the extent of the nonconformity within the required 75 -foot shoreland setback area increases the amount of runoff that will be directed to Lake Minnewashta and is contrary to the intent of the ordinance. The City Code allows for owners to improve their properties in ways that reduce an existing nonconformity. Increasing the size and amount of structure located within the shoreland setback increases, rather than decreases the existing nonconformity. The proposed reduction to the property's impervious surface does not meaningfully improve the property's stormwater management. Increasing and maintaining nonconformities is not in line with the intent of the 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 lots substandard size combined with the required front and lake setbacks mean a reasonably sized home could not be constructed on the property without a variance; however, the requested variances significantly exceed the minimum variances needed for the construction of a reasonably sized home. c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: The property is located in an older subdivision and the existing structure does not conform to the current zoning code. The parcel is significantly smaller than the minimum size required for riparian lots zoned RSF. The substandard nature of the lot makes it impossible to construct a single-family home meeting the current zoning code. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The proposed home is larger than those located on the surrounding properties, and deviates for the general lake home aesthetic present in the community. 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 #2018-01, dated January 2, 2018, prepared by MacKenzie Walters, is incorporated herein. 2 DECISION "The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments denies a variance request to allow an 11.5 -foot front yard setback, a 22.1 -foot lakeshore setback, and an 11 percent lot coverage variance." ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 2nd day of January, 2018. CITY OF CHANHASSEN M Andrew Aller - Chairman COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division — 7700 Market Boulevard Mailing Address — P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952) 227-1300 / Fax: (952) 227-1110 CITY OF CNANAASSEN APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Submittal Date: 12 PC Date: ) 2 CC Date: Z% 60 -Day Review Date: b Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply) (Refer to the appropriate Application Checklist for required submittal information that must accompany this application) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment ......................... $600 ❑ Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers ..... $100 ❑ Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (_ lots) ❑ Single -Family Residence ................................ $325 ❑Metes & Bounds (2 lots)..................................$300 ❑ All Others......................................................... $425 ❑ Interim Use Permit (IUP) ❑ Lot Line Adjustment.........................................$150 ❑ In conjunction with Single -Family Residence.. $325 ❑ Final Plat ..........................................................$700 ❑ All Others......................................................... $425 ❑ Rezoning (REZ) Additional escrow may be required for other applications ❑ Planned Unit Development (PUD) .................. $750 ❑ Minor Amendment to existing PUD ................. $100 $300 ❑ All Others......................................................... $500 ❑ Sign Plan Review...................................................$150 Variance (VAR) .................................................... ❑ Site Plan Review (SPR) Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) ❑ Administrative ..................................................$100 ❑ Single -Family Residence ............................... $150 ❑ Commercial/Industrial Districts*......................$500 ❑ All Others ....................................................... $275 Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area: Zoning Appeal ...................................................... ( thousand square feet) ❑ Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA)................. *Include number of existing employees: *Include number of new employees: ❑ Residential Districts ......................................... $500 Plus $5 per dwelling unit (_ units) ❑✓ Notification Sign (City to install and remove) ..... ❑ Subdivision (SUB) ❑ Create 3 lots or less .......................................$300 ❑ Create over 3 lots .......................$600 + $15 per lot (_ lots) ❑Metes & Bounds (2 lots)..................................$300 ❑ Consolidate Lots..............................................$150 ❑ Lot Line Adjustment.........................................$150 ❑ Final Plat ..........................................................$700 (Includes $450 escrow for attorney costs)* Additional escrow may be required for other applications through the development contract. ❑ Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (VAC)........ $300 (Additional recording fees may apply) ❑� Variance (VAR) .................................................... $200 ❑ Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) ❑ Single -Family Residence ............................... $150 ❑ All Others ....................................................... $275 ❑ Zoning Appeal ...................................................... $100 ❑ Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA)................. $500 NOTE: when multiple applications are processed concurrently the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. .......................................................................... $200 ❑✓ Property Owners' List within 500' (City to generate after pre -application meeting) .................................................. $3 per address 26 ❑ Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that apply) .................................... ( ..2.....a..d.... dresses.) ........ $50 per document El Conditional Use Permit ❑ Interim Use Permit E3 Vacation ❑ Site Plan Agreement ❑ Variance ❑ Wetland Alteration Permit ❑ Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) ❑ Easements (_easements) TOTAL FEE: ISection 2: Required Information Description of Proposal: Property Address or Location: Parcel #: 256600320 Legal Description: Total Acreage: 023 Wetlands Present? ❑ Yes ❑ No Present Zoning: Single -Family Residential District (RE] Requested Zoning: Select One Present Land Use Designation: Residential Low DensS Requested Land Use Designation: Select One Existing Use of Property: Detached Single Family 3617 Red Cedar Point Rd Block 4 Lot 9 Red Cedar Point Lake Minnewashta ❑Check box if separate narrative is attached. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division — 7700 Market Boulevard Mailing Address — P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952) 227-1130 / Fax: (952) 227-1110 AGENCY REVIEW REQUEST LAND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL CITY OF CHANHASSEN Please review and respond no later than the review response deadline Agency Review Request Date: Agency Review Response Deadline: Date Application Filed: December 6, 2017 December 21 2017 December 1, 2017 Contact: Contact Phone: Contact Email: MacKenzie Walters 952-227-1132 mwalters@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Assistant Planner ❑ US Fish & Wildlife Planning Commission Date: City Council Date: 60 -Day Review Period Deadline: January 2, 2018 at 7:00 p.m. January 22, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. Januar 30, 2018 Application: ® ® Forester Park Director Request to consider variances for hard cover, lake set back and front setback for property located at 3617 Red Cedar Point Road and zoned Single Family Residential- RSF . Owner: Patricia Souba. A licant: Todd & Kristin Jackson. Plannin Case: 2018-01 Web Pa e, www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/2018-01 In order for staff to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission and City Council review, we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on traffic circulation, existing and proposed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need for acquiring public lands or easements for park sites, street extensions or improvements, and utilities. Where specific needs or problems exist, we would like to have a written report to this effect from the agency concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. City Departments: Federal Agencies: Adiacent Cities: ❑ ® Attorney Building ❑ Army Corps of Engineers ❑ Chaska ® Official Engineer ❑ US Fish & Wildlife ❑ Eden Prairie ® Fire Marshal Watershed Districts: ❑ ❑ Jackson Township Minnetonka ® ® Forester Park Director ❑ Carver County W MO ❑ Shorewood ® Water Resources ❑ Lower MN River ❑ Victoria ❑ Law Enforcement ® ❑ Minnehaha Creek Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Adiacent Counties: Carver County Agencies: ❑ Hennepin ElCommunity Development Utilities: El Scott El Engineer ED Cable TV — Mediacom ElEnvironmental Services ElElectric — Minnesota Valley School Districts: ❑ Historical Society ❑ Electric — Xcel Energy ❑ Eastern Carver County 112 ❑ Parks ❑ Magellan Pipeline ❑ Minnetonka 276 ❑ Soil & Water Conservation District ❑ Natural Gas — CenterPoint Energy ❑ Phone — CenturyLink Other Agencies: State Agencies: ❑ Hennepin County Regional Railroad ❑ Board of Water & Soil Resources Authority ❑ Health ❑ MN Landscape Arboretum ❑ Historical Society ❑ SouthWest Transit ❑ Natural Resources -Forestry ❑ TC&W Railroad ❑ Natural Resources -Hydrology ❑ Pollution Control ❑ Transportation 7\ i! ? !\ /�/! � \ � � � : �� � i .� � k� 7 � \ 07 AA � The Gregory Group, Inc. as. INVOICE NO. _ 86905.87086 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY F.B.NO._.._ 1095.44 EUSEn6ea in)Nz SCALE: r= ... za . LAND SURVEYORS At 9.e.. r.m.6., «w%•w. REGISTERED UNDER THE l wsOF STATE OF MWNE$OTA O ol. .ntnw.. Nw17)N.3•wNtu 1%11560.Rg. YvpN Msa•SH3, Po,M Y4.fSl Surveyors (4ertifirair ' `•� °~•�� RWn/w EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY FOR: 4WO °•°�'�•n°ei^p1 6luiryni. •wnme9 MARK D. WILLIAMS CUSTOM HOMES P-Pom loe•rod to sn+ine i, TbnnoloP I I6. RNp D. Cnrte. Cottony. mmonso 1 RnPwIT Adawn: 3617 RW CW. Point Ra. Chnehl.nm, MN RlIKIImeA: N. dulaWy n1%We fMTT Elewlim.9)139 fen _ _ � -enn!!L. �d Cedar Point nr wan av6aro s--- R-� smN (aM1). T91M Sia -19IM OH W ]S TNI (v6nely NpR wam4 G�Nll14 31Yr4Aer uw 9111 k ko Q-dvry lays w1w!) Resdalle - 7631y k C� 3279 & Gr1r<I 9w/i¢ 2105lq k bhawu., /Cn9 . 5.99q k trot wd I� 139gk to/ x R 7ahl 3 k �ercenge x 3,g Nde: the naW d3.39q Rnrote1MdNmMr a...���IOMCia3s ar NCTofY cn,tbl aT/. 9f R1 P7T P . n,," Lake- M/nnewashta .m a+-/kamle. rcna-9.9.0 9la1 2SIJR R. No. 36/3 9N.0 ,9931 i M ~3 Oln- i D=k L9169 and 10. Block 4. RED CEDAR POINT LAKE MMNEWASHTA p•WMbiM. Cat)'6]CO9nty, Mlnnkyga 1 MIk W+91Y 11•M1 •0!tlbYm. w %alll.up•C�MN m a g61N]037 p»w 1 i as.r j, SO! j ivw CM99D.9 1 .,'•'r'•�•� ISIL I to I-9F-rR W x A03607 � 9l1.• v� xiaon r �T pNnau> 2 f1 f0 ?P m • 1on ! 9901 e% 901 y50•��-'" a !f9 119.3 wf. r nqn, l.fr r yl M - !HO "0 j S� !•4t 1 _ 9r�rp,Y-•_--_�.' W.w ew6.9 _'916.114 P . n,," Lake- M/nnewashta .m a+-/kamle. rcna-9.9.0 9la1 2SIJR R. No. 36/3 9N.0 ,9931 i M ~3 Oln- i D=k L9169 and 10. Block 4. RED CEDAR POINT LAKE MMNEWASHTA p•WMbiM. Cat)'6]CO9nty, Mlnnkyga 1 MIk W+91Y 11•M1 •0!tlbYm. w %alll.up•C�MN m a g61N]037 MEMORANDUM TO: MacKenzie Walters, Assistant City Planner FROM: Vanessa Strong, Water Resources Coordinator DATE: December 20, 2017 SUBJ: Variances for 3617 Red Cedar Point Road In response to We are requesting the following variances on the property: 1. 10.9% hard cover variance 2. 22.1ft. lake set back variance 3. 18.5 ft. front yard setback from property line to the NE garage corner Justifications for the variances: 1. The lot is sub standard. 2. We will be removing an old structure and building a new home. 3. Increased tax base for the city. 4. We will reduce the current hard cover by 44 sq ft. 5. Current homes in the neighborhood have similar variances that we are applying for and therefore this helps justify the variances. 6. We will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 7. We will be bringing the side setback into compliance by removing the outhouse. Variance requests 1 and 2 (impervious surface, and lake setback) are water resource based variances. None of the justifications for variances addresses impacts to the health of Lake Minnewashta. What impact does exceeding impervious surface by 10.9%, and significantly reducing lake setback have on the water quality and ecosystem function of Lake Minnewashta? The applicant has not addressed these primary issues. Allowing such a significant impervious surface overage to continue without addressing these issues sets a dangerous precedent. In response to "Our plan is to build a single family home (plans attached) that will improve the neighborhood from an aesthetics and tax base standpoint." A 22.1' reduced lake setback, and 10.9% impervious surface overage impairs the health of Lake Minnewashta. A 44 sf reduction in impervious provides no measurable water quality benefit. Lakes with low water quality and ecosystem function reduce property values. They significantly reduce neighborhood aesthetic. In summary Water Resources staff does not recommend approval of the variance for the following reasons: Water resource justifications must be provided for water resource variances. A variance application for this lakefront property must be shown to Improve and protect Lake Minnewashta to the maximum extent possible including: 1. A permanent 20' native vegetated buffer must be installed along the shoreline using species native to the ecotype with permanent buffer monuments. The buffer may work around the path and stairs. The buffer must be designed and installed by an experienced professional in native shoreline restoration. Design plan must be approved by the Water Resources Coordinator. 2. The property owner must work with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to identify and implement any shoreline restoration projects that would improve ecosystem health and function. Replace riprap with bioengineering solutions is one example. 3. Attempt to achieve 25% impervious surface coverage through reduction of any unnecessary impervious surface (driveway, sidewalk, patio etc.) through the use of pervious paver systems. 6 MEMORANDUM TO: MacKenzie Walters, Assistant Planner FROM: Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resources Specialist DATE: January 2, 2018 SUBJ: 3617 Red Cedar Pt Rd, Variances to construct a home The lot has a number of existing mature trees in the rear yard. To mitigate the impervious surface coverage for the lot, all trees within the rear yard must be protected and preserved. To protect the trees during construction, the following practices are required: Tree protection fencing must be properly installed at the edge of construction. This must be done prior to any construction activities and remain installed until all construction is completed. • When excavating near the tree, roots should be cut by hand or a vibratory plow to avoid ripping or tearing the roots. • No equipment or materials may be stored within the tree protection area/rear yard. Additionally, as required by city ordinance, one tree will be required to be planted in the front yard. Recommendations: i. Tree protection fencing must be properly installed at the edge of the grading limits across the entire south side. This must be done prior to any construction activities and remain installed until all construction is completed. Any trees lost to construction activities shall be replaced. 2. No equipment may be stored within the tree protection area. 3. Appropriate tree protection measures must be taken to protect the rear yard ash from EAB. MEMORANDUM TO: MacKenzie Walters, Assistant Planner FROM: George Bender, Assistant City Engineer DATE: December 18, 2017 SUBJ: Multiple Variance Requests for 3617 Red Cedar Point Rd Planning Case: 2018-01 The requested variances have been reviewed and the following comments were noted: • A title search for the property should be required in order to document all existing easements. • The plan should define the removal of the existing gravel rather than only noting the intent in the letter. The plan should detail the driveway clearly. Some of the dimensioning is difficult to read. CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on December 21, 2017, 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 a request consider variances for hard cover, lake set back and front setback for property located at 3617 Red Cedar Point Road and zoned Single Family Residential (RSF). Owner: Patricia Souba. Applicant: Todd & Kristin Jackson 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. Subscribed and sworn to before me this - day of U(e4bli —12017 N ary Public Kim . Meuwissen, Depu CI k "' a JENNIFER ANN POTTER Notary Public -Minnesota Aly Commission EVkes inn 37, 2o2o 2 W C d 2 0) O _ 9 0 0 ` = 0"' d _ _N O >� c R 10 f6 _ w `°=odEo ac wy�C C �� LL M O 0) N 0-0 a) 7 > Y C d d.R G a) N EL.. > c 0) �>.n oa%EE 90 @� E v v 2. -§, >. a) d NUS m rn= Y6 O N 7 c m m rc v "ood„ ZEad�3o E d'O d 7.� 3 'o w o w o dM d O. �•d WO rnv naoi N m Q) EdS�g �� m >1 o '0O .N £._-o 3 CE0)0;d o -aoa _aE""�W3 wUEE- a9` -fig atm>(D t (D d ai E£L U 0)a N c 7�0)jL-oE>c 007 -,Uc EE - o`n cO� Ec co CD ;O O O E d 0 E O>+U W N O 0) 0 Oil Eai W= E2' v_ no,i)a m=c :c$ F°YU O Cl) N C O Cw .L. 0. aw'c.. L E 7p_ 0) E dd,Q >.�_0701NL ma-= Or ERE -Ott.. m-�>.wmm§. �mmm v E p 10 0 d! d 0 > W S 0)+d' � c 0 C N O U O 0) c C N d 0 A* -c E O O I C) U l6 N d L >i N 3 -5= w 0 E U a E- o g n@ m m� nmg O.O L °) OE « N Q,_ d m0) 0)cy C�Ld. w U O..L. L O w c N N CY F `0- 8�m mit m�`ra95'TEc p00 t o or O U co p 0)C N' c c- 3 E ppyUON—ANO L C O' o o� 3 O .� Enw "s tom-i0mv=-� °c ° r o N o in E 0@ o f0 16 O O.O C .. 0 0 V). d cc 7 N Y — 10 -,.,.6 € 5a09 tsm o= m T N N O) L `� a o. _ U N a U�._`d°saa .Egay�� d c 0) 01 0,c N .0 y O.L. 0) N-0 "O U 0 0) d' N 0) O) N m 7 0) TL U 6m E C co U w d d C .L..-' 0 0 7 wu� = tUNEi v> n E a m w W o O(q t6 > O CL.. O) > N @ O. N N O d 3 U C amn 'e`'o,m5 =.ebo=d=8 N 0 E m Q > p c O 0 2 �' �'c > o d o 7 C 7 L U U a� E'o 3 �i m M c 01 +" 3 o X d. =L0 3--rvc QmGOm v N -L 07 0) O CY N w Cr O.N 010— 0) N 7 C' N d 0) c O.Es a. 0 w a d y 0.0) N N C .0 N 10 EWm H`U-m Z`c U:0Y NU 0 OL O0730).W 0)dd Oc 0 00 m'- gm°' = ac=smo-L"p c "- 03 N 7> 'U c U .0 C01 cc !L ° -.ti .� 7 V w d C 10 c 0) ><0Nc dNNi(6r 0) U 10 N L E .c 0. 10 N <0 0)L jENN 0 a 0) 7 soma Ec_> ao'° m�w mac cyCOLC 7 16 c@N ' 'O E 00'.2 W.�U co U d~ 0p C O d.2c 10 0 %E58 --S-"8 E 2 - (6 a) O U O N '6 N U O E d d 0. C C d N O -'C = n 0) L N .... O. L 05 d 10 '�- p r d— w _ co 16 O _m ao a m s do=m a Q `o w >. U _ 01 O Y "O C N O N 0) 3 n O O. "' d co E U C TO1y p. L 0) N V d d N c a+ E N C - =_ m"A'-Q nmm ^' _ E c ma 0„' a5 @m10 _— N c OLL'at$ G10 c:E 7@ dEL C 07 c N N 0 3 0 0)U' yddy O SE �m= =Ey c° E wwD❑ma.. y mx j.r cO -47,0 �m O.0 U@L O7L7 F -U LL Nd0)ECEd�O)'O� 3Z5 "mg mcg�W«csy d O ... �. N N L C E ng` =c EdiaE=dgocv F -7U o 0)LLF-MQ O t0 L O_d 7VJ F07 f0 O. O O> 0 C "`L-'iN 07 0cC °- na rnm'm NMR — O.0 wUO 10 0) E> my q8S; g'0vmcm�=�mmi°15€� Ear, d Q. C o 9 m o 9 a' m$ c E it E ad U) Ny c' m dm- mwt v Do sy'a9m o N � am 21? >- o aci vi w �1pp afd.) d CU j - 0E d E �U:samv �SY 2 vn Em55 o�"c-yc8 cv nmme>.`o amiv ".w�m'ov O O L U $CaEo.s ��-maov=E�' ywyAx w 0 J d / \ d J l0 ry U Z n 2 U N U N F n 3 N n Q E. V N '-I N N J N n 00 1- O N n A 00 00 O M 4 N N n Il N 00 Op W 0) r4 tD 00 lO D1 1- l0 00 Ow 0) 1- V N 0) e4 N N n I, A N-tt N n n c-1 N N a L! W LO m 00 A O lD I, 0) 1- w W w D1 N N N I, I, N w lD n M N O N n I, N w W 3 0) N N I, I, N 00 w W W O1 A N N n I, A V O m N N n n N w O n Ol ri A (D 00 W 0) N p� N M p 0 0 QI o to X Z Z M 0 1n Z M 0 In Z m Ln l!1 Z m o In Z m o o Z m o N Z M o o Z m Ln o Z M vn In Z V o In Z V Ln o Z M Ln to Z m vi In Z m o In Z m o In Z M Ln to Z m Ln to Z w voi to Z M Ln o Z M M Ln Z �"� a m 0) m in to Z M Ln N Z M Ln to Z m Ln to Z O Y Y H O7 Z Z K K K K 1' K D K= O o Q OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 (0 O � � {{/0/�� 0 0 0 0 0 c 0c 0 0 v_� O O OO Q Y J J J J J J J J w W J J J J J J C J = J J J J N W W W W W W W W W W Z Z W W W W W W W W W J W W W W X Q U U U U U V U U V U Z Z V U U U U U U V Z U U V U Q S X X X X X X X X X X CC cc X X X X X X O X X¢ X X X X U Z Z Z p Z p p p Z Z Z a m Q d Q Q Q w oo_ a Z z 0 W s z p C p p p> K o: lz w Z K p K J J Q S p p U p V U U z p O w } U p} Z w w S w 2 S S W W W Q WccS O W oY F U > p p 7 p O p Z p p U 0C U p V �W W O w O o O W W Q O W o: s � rn m ao r, N m ti ui m o tt o Ln kD O N O m m O N N m 0 m 0 0 0 N lD lD I, W n ID w N l0 to M m lD N O n N m m m M m m M N M m N In M m M M I WE n H Z w K CC N Q Y y N Z Q �_ U > H Z w a(D z V N O � z Q� g w Qz O Z m O= Y lai Y Q Z w Y Z V u } Q Z J O o N W CL yaj a J Q~< K H Q p O O Z p o_ l7 CD U x �Vif N K H Z m U > Z w O Z Z W O = Q O W Z O Q p H Z y Z a 0 W Q z y Y m y F Cf aWC Ln W Z Z Q Q Q V LD 0 a Z'n p ::� J > w Z m 0 Z co CD 7 oz Y Z U w Q W O_ K� J W O(D J N W O to Q w>> K w J Z O Z? 0 O C7 N Q l7 Y ww 0 V' oU F- Z Z Z I- 0 a a p Q U 7 0 N a s Q V O 0 aa a p o = a 0 p } U u a p Q 0 0 awc N to c m z m z = z O I� N O N N M O N N 0 O N N N M M m N M M N M M m M N K H Z m U > Z w O Z Z W O = Q O W Z O Q p H Z y Z a 0 W Q z y Y m y F Cf aWC Ln W Z Z Q Q Q V LD 0 a Z'n p ::� J > w Z m 0 Z co CD 7 oz Y Z U w Q W O_ K� J W O(D J N W O to Q w>> K w J Z O Z? 0 O C7 N Q l7 Y ww 0 V' oU F- MacKenzie Walters' notes from conversation with Debby Lockhart, resident living at 3618 Red Cedar Point, on 12/11/2017. The resident has asked that these notes be entered into the public record and distributed to the members of the Planning Commission. Ms. Lockhart expressed the following concerns regarding the proposed variance for 3617 Red Cedar Point: 1) She stated that the property does have a bathroom, and the "outhouse" has been used for ski storage ever since the property was connected to city services. 2) She believes that proposed house is oversized for the lot in question, and feels that the variances granted for other new homes in the region kept the houses appropriately scaled to their lots. 3) She is concerned about the amount of impervious surface that is required to accommodate the proposed house. 4) She feels that the site cannot accommodate a three -car garage, and that a two -car garage would be more appropriate given the size of the lot. 5) She does not think that height, size, and design of the house fit with the `lake home" character of the neighborhood. 6) She asked that it be noted that the snowplow currently uses the property's gravel area to complete a turnaround maneuver, and is concerned about the logistics of snow removal for the area if the house is constructed as proposed. 7) She is concerned that tree in the front yard is being removed but no replacement tree is shown in the proposal. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA VARIANCE 2018-01 1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants the following variance: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves an 11.5 -foot front yard setback, a 22.1 -foot lakeshore setback, and an 11 percent lot coverage variance. 2. Property. The variance is for a property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota, and legally described as Lot 9, Block 4, Red Cedar Point Lake Minnewashta. 3. Conditions. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant must apply for and receive a building permit. 2. A title search for the property should be conducted to ensure any/all existing easements are documented 3. A new 1" = 20' scale survey should be provided as part of the building permit application clearly showing the propose setbacks and lot coverage for the proposed house and structures. 4. At least one tree must be planted in front yard, if one is not present after construction. 5. Tree protection fencing must be properly installed at the edge of the grading limits across the entire south side. This must be done prior to any construction activities and remain installed until all construction is completed. Any trees lost to construction activities beyond those indicated in the tree removal plan shall be replaced. 6. No equipment may be stored within the tree protection area. 7. Appropriate tree protection measures must be taken to protect the rear yard ash from EAB. 8. The 162 square foot rear patio area is understood to be the property's water oriented structure. 9. Lot coverage may not exceed 3,319 square feet. 10. The proposed rear patio and driveway areas must be constructed using pervious paver systems. 11. A permanent 20 -foot native vegetated buffer must be installed along the shoreline using species native to the ecotype with permanent buffer monuments. The buffer may work around the path and stairs. The buffer must be designed and installed by an experienced professional in native shoreline restoration. Design plan must be approved by the Water Resources Coordinator. 12. The property owner must work with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to identify and implement any shoreline restoration projects that would improve ecosystem health and function. Replace riprap with bioengineering solutions is one example. 4. Lapse. If within one (1) year of the issuance of this variance the allowed construction has not been substantially completed, this variance shall lapse. Dated: January 2"d, 2018 I (SEAL) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) (ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) CITY OF CHANHASSEN Denny Laufenburger, Mayor Todd Gerhardt, City Manager The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of , 2018 by Denny Laufenburger, Mayor and Todd Gerhardt, City Manager, of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to authority granted by its City Council. NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)227-1100