Loading...
1997-06-17 minutes CHANHASSEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPPEALS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 17, 1997 Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Willard Johnson, Carol Watson and Steve Berquist STAFF PRESENT: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II and Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner I A REQUEST FOR AN 18 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 30 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A POOL, ROBERT AND LAURA EVANS, 331 DEERFOOT TRAIL Cynthia Kirchoff presented the staff report. Robert Evans questioned why the yard abutting Lake Riley Boulevard is a front yard rather than a rear yard because they use it as a back yard. He stated that several variances have been granted on Lake Riley Boulevard. Mr. Evans stated that the pool will be engineered, the landscaping will be professionally done and that the project will exceed City Code standards. He also stated that he would like to construct this pool so that his daughter will have a safe place to play. As to measurements of setbacks,he stated that through his experience in the asphalt business, the setback is measured from the center of the road. Steve Berquist asked why the property has two front yards. He asked if the original plat showed the two front yards. Al-Jaff stated that the yard is considered to be front yard because it abuts a public street. Carol Watson stated the she has two front yards on her property because it is a corner lot. Berquist asked if pools can be constructed in the 30 foot rear yard setback. Sharmin Al-Jaff stated that based on square footage, accessory structures must maintain a certain setback in the rear yard. Berquist questioned if the pool would be permitted in a rear yard and if the setbacks were specified in the original plat. Al-Jaff stated that a pool could be constructed in the rear yard and that the setbacks were shown on the plat. Evans stated he was told the only thing he can construct in this yard is a driveway. He questioned why he can construct a driveway and not a pool. 1 1 Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes May 20, 1997 Page 2 Al-Jaff stated the driveway could exceed the 25 percent hard surface coverage requirement. She stated that the property already has access. Ms. Al-Jaff stated that a hardship must be demonstrated and that a reasonable use does exist on the property. Berquist stated that staff interprets the Code. He stated that a variance is granted because a hardship is demonstrated. Evans stated that their hardship is a family friend and that they would just like to improve their property. Berquist stated that he appreciates the fact that the applicant wants to improve the property. He stated the original developer maximized the property and constrained their ability to construct a structure in that yard. He stated that he would like the pool to work without approving a variance. Al-Jaff stated that staff had not reviewed the proposal that the applicant had presented at the meeting. She stated that the applicant had proposed a kidney-shaped pool. The staff report and the recommendation was based upon what was submitted to the city. Evans stated that they never intended on constructing kidney-shaped pool,but a rectangular. Kirchoff stated that she spoke with Becky at Valley Pools. She stated alternative locations were investigated,however, all would require a variance. Watson stated that the issue is the lot is less than 15,000 sq. ft. She stated that it is the responsibility of the owner to determine if a structure can be built prior to purchase. Berquist stated that he is unsure if he would be willing to grant a variance and that he is uncertain as to what the applicant is requesting. He stated that the 1%variance from the lot coverage requirement does not concern him,but the variance to the setback does. He stated that he understands the desire but would like to see a pool plan that is less extensive. Evans stated that they cannot use the back yard. Watson stated that staff did not receive the information that the applicant presented at the meeting and that staff is at a disadvantage since they have not seen the revised plan. She stated that she would like to table this application so that the applicant may work with staff regarding the size and the location. 1 P, Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes May 20, 1997 Page 3 Berquist stated that he does not want to create a false hope for the applicant by tabling this request. Evans stated that he only needs one variance. Watson stated that the homes on Lake Riley Boulevard have received variances because the lots were unbuildable without it. She stated that not being able to build a single family home is a hardship. Berquist stated that many of the homes on Lake Riley Boulevard were constructed prior to the land being platted and predate the ordinance. Evans asked why the City needs 30 feet of his property. Berquist stated that the applicant should submit something that may work and that is less obtrusive. Watson asked if the City could waive the $75.00 fee. Berquist stated that the item should be tabled so that staff and the applicant may work on an alternative design. Watson moved,Berquist seconded the motion to table the variance application. The motion carried with a vote of 3 to 0. Al-Jaff informed the Board that the item needs to be voted on by September 30, 1997. Johnson asked if the $75.00 application fee could be waived for the applicant. Al-Jaff stated that she would investigate this. A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A DECK WITHIN THE 75 FOOT WETLAND SETBACK OF LOTUS LAKE,ROBERT AND LAURA EVANS,331 DEERFOOT TRAIL Al-Jaff presented the staff report. Roger Stech stated that the former owner was granted a variance in 1990, however, the deck was never constructed. Berquist asked if the deck will be 38 feet from the wetland. 1 1 Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes May 20, 1997 Page 4 Stech stated that the deck will not exceed past the boulder retaining wall. Al-Jaff stated that this home is closer than any of the neighbor's decks to the wetland. She stated that the ordinance has been amended to reduce the setback to 40 feet and that the wetland will not be impacted. Berquist asked how you can tell the wetland will not be affected. Al-Jaff stated that the setback depends on the type of wetland and that the buffer offers protection. Watson asked if the buffer was natural protection. Berquist asked if the variance would be for 2 feet from the current wetland setback.. Johnson stated that this application requested a lesser variance than that in 1990. Berquist asked why the deck is not brought into compliance with the code. Stech stated that the deck size is minimum for a round table chairs. Berquist moved, Watson seconded the motion to approve the variance from the wetland with conditions outlined in the staff report. The motion carried with a vote of 3 to 0. Chairman Johnson closed the public hearing. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Watson moved, Johnson seconded to approve the minutes of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting dated May 20, 1997. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Berquist moved, Johnson seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. Prepared and Submitted by Cynthia Kirchoff Planner I i FILE AGENDA CHANHASSEN ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1997 AT 6:00 P.M. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Call to Order 1. Request for an 18 foot variance for the construction of a pool 12 feet from the rear lot line on property zoned PUDR and located at 331 Deerfoot Trail (Lot 10, Sunny Slope Addition), Robert and Laura Evans. 2. Request for a variance to construct a deck within the 75 foot wetland setback of Lotus Lake for the construction of a deck on property zoned RSF and located at 491 Trapline Lane, Roger and Gail Stech. 3. Approval of Minutes. Adjournment 1 1 CITY OF , BOA DATE: 6/17/97 \\I rk"AL cHANBAssEN CC DATE: CASE #: 97-6 �-� • By: Kirchoff:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: An eighteen (18) foot variance from the thirty (30) foot front yard setback requirement and a one(1)percent variance from the twenty-five(25)percent maximum lot coverage requirement for the construction of a pool. LOCATION: 331 Deerfoot Trail (Lot 10, Block 1, Sunny Slope Addition) V APPLICANT: Robert and Laura Evans 331 Deerfoot Trail CL Chanhassen, MN 55317 a. 445-0565 Q PRESENT ZONING: PUD R, Planned Unit Development Residential ACREAGE: Approximately 13,200 sq. fi. (.29 Acres) DENSITY: N/A ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USES: RSF, Residential Single Family A-2, Agricultural Estate District QWATER AND SEWER: Available to the site PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site is a double frontage lot that contains an existing single-family residence. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential la If a1 a, r Bandimere �' 9100 t Heights o Park �� n :rf..t Band m • ere 9200 * µ•� /iii, 1,..� Lake Commuaf ty •"` a " Riley ? c 9300 Park = U j.,. , 9400 ..... O. a .. cu ) i PROPOSED VAF ICE U 1 2 9500 — •I 49'''''''-- 1 _ W.96th Stree` Q��` Ill I 9600 a(tr , kr .... I. r____ 2- ,I evie 9700 .f' Walql kkOW I ; . QQ��taJ ' �` 9800 , 3 )1- Ilk P��� 4 , , ,,, „ ,-,_,..„, ,, . ,-„-- : ; 4 4 2:• •. / Nile 0. C ."' - % 4,, 99 ' 9900 NAla -u` pI• 5"‘:6 A\ AM :;1".: 1 41111 //;11 10000 • 10100 . ) / / ''/ til creeuwood //�P 10200 f\\___1_fr_t_.,,_ c (qJ k . L:ne y 10300 e L et`re9 r-Ti.v� i 10400 w $ Evans Variance June 17, 1997 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-615 requires that all structures maintain a minimum of a thirty(30) foot setback from the front and rear property lines (Attachment 2). Section 20-615 states that the maximum lot coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is twenty-five (25)percent of the total lot area. Section 20-904 states that swimming pools may be located in rear yards with a minimum side and rear setback of ten (10) feet(Attachment 3). BACKGROUND The subject property is located in Sunny Slope Addition. This planned unit development was approved in 1977. Of the 12 lots in this development, 6 have a double frontage, meaning, Lots 7-12 abut Lake Riley Blvd. to the south and Deerfoot Trail to the north. This PUD required a 20 foot setback along Deerfoot Trail and a 30 foot setback along Lake Riley Boulevard. The reduced setback intended to compensate for the decreased lot depth. The existing residence does meet these setback requirements. The lot has approximately 60 feet of frontage on Deerfoot Trail and 169 feet of frontage on Lake Riley Boulevard. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting an 18 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback(actually the rear of the home) requirement and approximately a 1 percent variance from the 25 percent maximum lot coverage requirement to construct a pool. The 16 foot by 28 foot, kidney-shaped pool is proposed to be located south and west of the existing residence. The proposal does not include the decking or the fence. The contractor stated that typically a 3 foot decking is placed around the pool. The pool, including the decking, would bring the pool approximately 9 feet from the property line that abuts Lake Riley Boulevard. Also, City Code states that an in-ground swimming pool shall be protected by a fence with a minimum height of 5 feet. Typically, a pool is permitted in the rear yard as long as a 10 foot setback is maintained in the side and rear yard. In this case, the applicant has Lake Riley Boulevard bordering on the rear of the home so the 30 foot setback must be maintained rather than the 10 foot. The majority of the proposed pool encroaches into the required setback. In addition, accessory structures are not permitted in the front yard setback and technically this property has two front yards. Staff has calculated the lot coverage and found that the existing structures (house, driveway) and pool with the decking will exceed the 25 percent maximum lot coverage requirement. The residence and the driveway cover 2,728 sq. ft. of the lot and the pool area is approximately 750 Evans Variance --� June 17, 1997 Page 3 sq. ft. This additional impervious surface increases the hard surface coverage to 26 percent, 1 percent beyond what is permitted by ordinance. The lot area is 13,200 sq. ft. so 3, 300 sq. ft. is permitted to be covered by an impervious surface. Approximately 3,475 sq. ft. of the site is proposed to be covered by a hard surface. The applicant contends that the variance is needed to provide a safe alternative for their child and for daily exercise (See Attachment 1). The reasons presented are inconsistent with the conditions for granting a variance. According to Section 20-58, a variance may be granted if the enforcement of the chapter would cause a hardship. Staff believes that the enforcement of the 30 foot setback requirement is not a hardship. The property has a reasonable use of the property as compared to those within 500 feet. A single family home with an attached garage exists on this property. The inability to construct a pool on a property is not a hardship. Many residents do not have a pool on their property and still enjoy a reasonable use. Staff has discussed this proposal in detail with the applicant prior to the submittal of this request and explained that the variance would not be recommended by staff as a hardship has not been demonstrated. Staff also explained that the pool will have to be engineered to sustain the slope in the yard. A retaining wall consisting of keystone brick, wood or boulder would be appropriate. Staff has also discussed the proposal with the contractor, Valley Pools, and made them aware that -� a pool is not appropriate in this yard. FINDINGS The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre-existing standards in this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. Finding: The applicants have not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of this variance. The property can and has been put to reasonable use as a single family home exists on this site. Staff surveyed Sunny Slope Addition and found that all properties have maintained the appropriate setback (decks may encroach 5 feet, so setback would be 25 feet) along Lake Riley Boulevard. The applicant has an opportunity to use and enjoy their property without the pool. Approving this variance would depart from the existing standards and would create a new setback along Lake Riley Boulevard. In addition, it may �` Evans Variance June 17, 1997 Page 4 allow for a proliferation of variances. When this report was written no variances were granted in this PUD. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. Finding: The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally,to other property within the same zoning classification. c. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Finding: Although, the variation does not appear to be based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the property, the applicant does have a reasonable use of the property. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding: Staff believes that the hardship is entirely self-created. The applicant knew when they bought the property that it has two street frontages. The proposal itself is creating a hardship. Once again,the inability to construct a pool is not a hardship. e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Finding: The granting of the variance could be detrimental to the public welfare. If the variance is approved, the applicant will be allowed to encroach further into a requirement setback that abuts a public street without a hardship. Additionally, the pool is required to have a minimum of a 5 foot high fence surrounding it and the maximum height of an open fence in the front yard is 4 feet. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Finding: The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair neighborhood property values. Evans Variance --. June 17, 1997 Page 5 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals adopt the following motion: "The Board of Adjustments and Appeals denies the request for an 18 foot variance from the 30 foot setback requirement and the variance from the hard surface coverage requirement based upon the findings presented in the staff report and the following: 1. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. 2. The applicant has an opportunity to enjoy a reasonable use of the property without constructing a pool." If the Board of Adjustments and Appeals should grant the variance the following conditions shall apply: 1. The applicant shall have the pool engineered by a registered engineer. 2. The applicant shall provide type III erosion control. -� 3. The applicant shall comply swimming pool fence requirements. ATTACHMENTS 1. Application and Letter 2. Section 20-615, Lot Requirements and Setbacks 3. Section 20-904, Accessory Structures 4. Site Plan 5. Property Owners CUU i( 01 t I (JO CI Of t9c77 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE cmTv cHANIH6SSFni CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 MAY 3 0 1997 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: Ro ber-'c )v,ct LCtV EIGtAS OWNER: ADDRESS: 33I ,Dee "i. -mG>.% I ADDRESS: TELEPHONE(Daytime) 1-415--Os (2G TELEPHONE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit _ Vacation of ROW/Easements • Interim Use Permit Variance Non-conforming Use Permit _ Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development* Zoning Appeal Rezoning _ Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Notification Sign Site Plan Review* X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) v Hsve-, Subdivision* TOTAL FEE$ / c K NID,s4 A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. 'Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2"X 11" reduced copy of ansparency for each plan sheet. `*Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE-When multiple applications are processed,the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME LOCATION , r. _r l(i(4.=, ,A-( 6 LEGAL DESCRIPTION t\ L -L / I�^ �� l J f TOTAL ACREAGE 1NETLANDS PRESENT YES )< NO PRESENT ZONING ki f.� et 1 I REQUESTED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION :Yik;J REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION �'',2 REASON FOR THIS REQUEST /N :1 n 004,.Dt a 1 i i �'_i �, ffi,1\'I f 'ic) ri!'f�.� ,!' ';/.�' I /1. 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, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the_ application shall be made within,egbusiness days of application submittal. A written — notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. 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 have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed 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. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. 7 Signature of Applicant "" - Date Signatrue of Fee Owner r� Date Application Received on b/ >Jc17 Fee Paid 41) / "Q) Receipt No. /r7 " The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. if not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. CITY OF CHANHAcSSEN May 28, 1997 MAY 3 0 1997 CF1Nwnn..JCir ., w vG i Dear Sirs and Madams of City Council: I, Laura Evans, of sound mind, am in need of a formal variance. I need a footage easement to be lessened on our property of ten feet by the City, so that we will be able to properly place and construct an area for a pool. The pool will provide physical exercise to be performed daily (weather permitting), to alleviate anxiety and stress which I am under medical care for. Also, I must provide a safe physical routine for our daughter because of her A.D.H.D. condition. Three- out-of-three persons in this household either, because of mental conditions, laborious daily duties of work, a strive for excellence and in the nature of"providing for" our family would benefit. Our lives are a)365 day, year around battle to live co-existingly with all our surroundings and habitat. Thirdly, I also take care of mentally retarded persons who are in need of daily exercise and privacy. During the months of May, June, July, August and September, my stress and anxiety levels will be drastically reduced. For other reasons extremely private to me, I cannot swim in public pools and/or recreational lakes. As Rob and I are living here now, we plan to stay to see through to our daughters education/special needs. The yard parcel part of the property becomes totally useless. I volunteer and work at our Carver County Schools. We are very loving and caring people, we need this variance to go through for the health and future of myself, as well as, our daughter's future. We will provide the most spectacular landscape available to us, around the pool area, which will enhance the beauty of our beautiful Lake Riley neighborhood. I would like to thank you for your precious time and physical energy given to hear this plea for help and accept the understanding of our human needs. We need to "all" recognize each others "time in need," just as our "neighboring flood victims" prayed and hoped for our help - basic needs - and fin c al needs to rebuild their lives. Th yo Laura . Evans & amily CUIGt rWCAlL § 20-595 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE b. For accessory structures, three (3) stories/forty(40) feet. (7) The minimum driveway separation is as follows: a. If the driveway is on a collector street, four hundred (400) feet. b. If the driveway is on an arterial street, one thousand two hundred fifty (1,250) feet. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 4(5-4-5), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 127, § 2, 3-26-90; Ord. No. 170, § 2, 6-8-92; Ord. No. 194, § 2, 10-11-93) Sec. 20-596. Interim uses. The following are interim uses in the "RR" District: (1) Commercial kennels and stables. (Ord. No. 120, § 3, 2-12-90) Editor's note—Inasmuch as there exists a§20-595,the provisions added by§3 of Ord.No. 120 as § 20-595 have been redesignated as § 20-596. Secs. 20-597-20-610. Reserved. ARTICLE XII. 'RSF" SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. 20-611. Intent. The intent of the "RSF" District is to provide for single-family residential subdivisions. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 5(5-5-1), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-612. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in an "RSF" District: (1) Single-family dwellings. (2) Public and private open space. (3) State-licensed day care center for twelve (12) or fewer children. (4) State-licensed group home serving six (6) or fewer persons. (5) Utility services. (6) Temporary real estate office and model home. (7) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 5(5-5-2), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 259, § 11, 11-12-96) Sec. 20-613. Permitted accessory uses. The following are permitted accessory uses in an "RSF" District: (1) Garage. Supp.No. 9 1210 ZONING § 20-615 (2) Storage building. (3) Swimming pool. (4) Tennis court. (5) Signs. (6) Home occupations. (7) One (1) dock. (8) Private kennel. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 5(5-5-3), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-614. Conditional uses. The following are conditional uses in an "RSF" District: (1) Churches. (2) Reserved. (3) Recreational beach lots. (4) Towers as regulated by article XXX of this chapter. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5.4), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 120, § 4(4), 2-12-90; Ord. No. 259, § 12, 11-12-96) State law reference—Conditional uses, M.S. § 462.3595. Sec. 20-615. Lot requirements and setbacks. The following minimum requirements shall be observed in an "RSF" District subject to additional requirements,exceptions and modifications set forth in this chapter and chapter 18: (1) The minimum lot area is fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet. For neck or flag lots, the lot area requirements shall be met after the area contained within the "neck"has been excluded from consideration. (2) The minimum lot frontage is ninety(90)feet, except that lots fronting on a cul-de-sac "bubble" or along the outside curve of curvilinear street sections shall be ninety (90) feet in width at the building setback line. The location of this lot is conceptually Supp.No.9 1211 § 20-615 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE illustrated below. Lots Where Frontage Is Measured At Setback Line ram..'►'.f��• • i cc• • • I . �. e • e• • (3) The minimum lot depth is one hundred twenty-five(125)feet.The location of these lots is conceptually illustrated below. Lot width on neck or flag lots and lots accessed by private driveways shall be one hundred (100) feet as measured at the front building setback line. . Nock / Flap Lots • Fton Lot Lino • • s I I it 100' Lot Width 1 I • 1 IT`" w''" � 1 I I I L. (4) The maximum lot coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is twenty-five (25) percent. (5) The setbacks are as follows: a. For front yards, thirty (30) feet. b. For rear yards, thirty (30) feet. Supp. No. 9 1212 ZONING § 20-632 c. For side yards, ten (10) feet. (6) The setbacks for lots served by private driveways and/or neck lots are as follows: a. For front yard, thirty (30) feet. The front yard shall be the lot line nearest the public right-of-way that provides access to the parcel. The rear yard lot line is to be located opposite from the front lot line with the remaining exposures treated as side lot lines. On neck lots the front yard setback shall be measured at the point nearest the front lot line where the lot achieves a one-hundred-foot minimum width. b. For rear yards, thirty(30) feet. c. For side yards, ten (10) feet. (7) The maximum height is as follows: a. For the principal structure, three (3) stories/forty (40) feet. b. For accessory structures, twenty (20) feet. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 5(5-5-5), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 90, § 1, 3-14-88; Ord. No. 127, § 3, 3-26-90; Ord. No. 145, § 2, 4-8-91; Ord. No. 240, § 18, 7-24-95) Editor's note—Section 2 of Ord. No. 145 purported to amend § 20-615(6)b. pertaining to accessory structures; such provision were contained in § 20-615(7)b., subsequent to amend- ment of the section by Ord. No. 127. Hence, the provisions of Ord. No. 145, § 2,were included as amending § 20-615(7)b. Sec. 20-616. Interim uses. The following are interim uses in the "RSF" District: (1) Private stables subject to provisions of chapter 5, article IV (2) Commercial stables with a minimum lot size of five (5) acres. (Ord. No. 120, § 3, 2-12-90) Secs. 20-617-20-630. Reserved. ARTICLE XIII. 'R-4" MIXED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. 20-631. Intent. The intent of the "R-4" District is to provide for single-family and attached residential development at a maximum net density of four (4) dwelling units per acre. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 6(5-6-1), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-632. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in an "R-4" District: (1) Single-family dwellings. (2) Two-family dwellings. Supp. No. 9 1213 C � Cc � �-► Ytit 1 3 ZONING § 20-904 (2) Concrete mixing plants. (Ord. No. 120, § 3, 2-12-90) Secs. 20-817-20-900. Reserved. ARTICLE IOIIII. GENERAL SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS DIVISION 1. GENERALLY Sec. 20-901. Overhead transmission lines. Installation of overhead transmission lines in excess of sixty-nine(69)kilovolts shall require the issuance of a conditional use permit through any district located in the city. The city council,in addition to the standards established in article IV,may also impose other conditions as deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare. (Ord. No. 80,Art. VI, § 2, 12-15-86) Sec. 20-902. Multiple principal buildings on same lot. In any single-family detached residential district not more than one (1) principal building shall be permitted to be erected on a single building lot. Groupings of buildings in other districts may only be permitted by conditional use permit. (Ord. No. 80,Art. VI, § 3, 12-15-86) Sec. 20-903. Zoning lots. (a) The designation of a zoning lot shall be approved by the city planner if it complies with the lot requirements of the district in which it is located and has a single tax identification number. (b) Interior lot lines within a zoning lot shall be disregarded in applying setbacks and other zoning ordinance standards. (c) After designation of a zoning lot the lot may not be subdivided without complying with the city's subdivision regulations. (Ord. No. 129, § 2, 6-4-90) 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 RSF and R-4 Districts accessory structures shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet. These structures may encroach into the rear setback as follows: a. Less than one hundred forty (140) square feet, minimum rear setback is five (5) feet. -� Supp.No.9 1232.7 § 20-904 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE b. One hundred forty-one (141) to three hundred ninety-nine (399) square feet, minimum rear setback is ten (10) feet. c. Four hundred (400) square feet and above, minimum rear setback is thirty(30) feet. (2) 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 thirty(30)percent of the yard in which it is built. (3) Tennis courts and swimming pools may be located in rear yards with a minimum side and rear yard setback of ten (10) feet, [but) however, must comply with applicable ordinary high water mark setbacks. (b) A detached accessory structure may occupy not more than thirty(30)percent of the area of any rear yard. (c) For parcels with less than three (3) acres in any residential or agricultural district, no accessory structure or use shall be erected, constructed, or commenced prior to the erection, construction,or commencement of the principal permitted structure or use,but may be erected or commenced simultaneously. If the principal structure or use is subsequently removed, destroyed, or discontinued, the accessory structure or use must be removed or discontinued within twelve (12) months. (Ord. No. 80,Art. VI, § 5, 12-15-86; Ord. No. 145, § 1, 4-8-91; Ord. No. 215, § 1, 8-8-94) Sec. 20-905. Single-family dwellings. All single-family detached homes shall: (1) Be constructed upon a continuous perimeter foundation that meets the requirements of the state building code. (2) Conform to the following standards for living areas: a. If a one-story rambler design, have an area of nine hundred sixty (960) square feet. b. If a split level design, have an area of one thousand fifty (1,050) square feet. c. If a split foyer and two-story design,have an area of six hundred(600)square feet on the first floor. d. A two-car garage must be provided with the single-family structure. (3) Have an earth covered,composition, shingled or tiled roof or other materials approved by the Uniform Building Code as adopted and amended by the city. (4) Receive a building permit. The application for a building permit in addition to other information required shall indicate the height, size, design and the appearance of all elevations of the proposed building and a description of the construction materials proposed to be used. Supp.No. 9 1232.8 0S-27-97 1S : S2 VALLEY POOLS ID=612B944934 P . 01 FRAM CITY OF CNRNHRSSEN 05. 27, IVY f 1.' :4 - CdCt 0'1 I,1/J-C;v ) 4.1i)/5 (4.-4./.9,0* , , _ i/Jo sr.iq.t.cr ' MAY 3 0 1997 Ci�'9NIVf1nJVLlr f�n.rru.v.�Cf ♦ _ Darall l lTy of CH-AN 1-#-A4 , PLAN i N pSPT. t'` . 30' pr4PcSE1 POOL dog bIG G 1 v 1 S e rCxx .1 I ng t r}j 30 V arcc �e-1-toc c r Y' u tr€, A �— ' tioc-ie.-1' a 1 ar►0 !.A Ice p 14t.y to v4 . a sF y be caved w) ryl art ou s su t4.1y-re...rit 1.0-1 Leiv•exciaC. 2-14f. 0,4. r r 13UP-bI# 6- MIT WcptA Lb Nort ae /+PPROi QD t-fI Via��� 1 V _. y„ou LD DE 7Zetpu t R . A HARDSHIP w - .1111.ii. L4if• \ .—. • • *-- --) - \V� e` 1 - • 1 r - iR a t' , ,,kr . p' apf,v1 ir's A , . . RON - KRUEGER & ASSOCIATES • INC. 1 ... ... , , : REGISTERED . 8140 FLYING CLOUD- DRIVE. EDEN "PhLAAIRtIED., SURVEYORS. ". ..1 ." , ... :.'-w.,.. -..... 1 ., . - • .. • :ri MINN. 55344 . PHONE 012-941.3030, ., , . • " CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY ......_ . . _ ., - . . . ._..T....... _____ ..._ Survey for - - .. ....,_ -- ---------- tJob No. 6.4,..za I Bk.44/0 P . 46.S I .. .. .. . . .. . STAFF'S REPRESENTATION OF PROPOSAL ON SURVEY CITY OF CHANHASSEN , •. . RECEIVED •.E.t._ VA 77 e/1".5 2.-41A4/ '..S*7; 0,c4.47.ev12- AUL - 7 1983 4,-4 ic2,4G e' F-GC1012— • 72:34:"4c:; ,C224.4440,4 7700t1-• COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DrA,1 i ..... , -_,... .„„, ., 4 . :,..,. .,,, , ..4_,...,...4, .. ..:..,,,-,r e,,,•,.: .. N•••,4.••••7 * -.• ‘.._,*•-•- ... 1,..L..„ -14:1:2, '4Ut-e., -''Nsf$c ":"4. 4/7 . :-i;•••/-.1.-.:74'biN '-, ...., ..:•.' ''. ,": '''"- .,.._ .H'1/41... ., -,, . ' , ...-. - ....-4.'f. "•-...,,,. ; ' .4 7.' -,,;,A!......,,,J,' , "..„1:.... " ;at-, -- .'-4-11"---•"*-4.'-?`'- -'' - ' sr' •"*"÷' /2/.2 0.3 ---:---..E.....z........4...*.r.T: ..-7i, A-At: . .., , -....-- • ww- • i . 0, . - N• in. -.--- - /' t 7:4 — /20- 54 LE I ii-r 30 1 ..., 0 -......... '0 A' ----it--------- \ /2/.4 N..._ II) • /2Z 3 _,.. • 75.° .... 1.v • V CP i /6.•67,4 \ • 0 IV o tojee,P0' 5 P .41e_ • • .7 ° Nall.6 4!)C-ic,ic- 1 /5.b7 r N. I !,' / 0 44,•13 / U7 AS(°\ _ - - - Hz, a_ .....-, //b.3 / -kg-fr. -- ._ , -. --1- ------ \ " . ---- Lo7"._... _/0- - - BA- -Tr.- ao' s ,a _____- -ci ------- - 1 - - t. 0.4 -........ _---. ....--- -,q -..„„...... i --....--. -------- ---- /aZ '' - -,w^,,•-k --'•*"..tAZI.:7...4.:.‘"4: •.5--• -.p' -, , •._-.•?,-,---2.-,,. • ,'';'‘,.:441.0r.-.:.;;;;... ;"0.:,tt'sP,`-';',,,- -"Ar7•:- - r '.;.'.."',' • ,,' 4-1#6,t4C3fil„.;:A-# _ Xt-..,4' , -,,P-fi•ri.r,t' ' - .i.:Ig . , ...... .. .---e, . 6;.., .,,,._.,. -,,,wkrgia,- ..-..- ,,,..r.-44,-,.i?t- . .- :ii..--- _-:,J.,.*:Af.--.,6'.5t4'1 O'•"-:-.'--7°'9 ..,:•-• 1- - -..r.-- 4- 4 .70.-FA' ,•ti4frle.',....."... 'i,' . ,... , J . etsi. •4. ,..... • ,•,fir,---f.%. . :4-- .a.. ..c., -jitsg .t-4... - • - 4. ..,.:,- - . • -..ri.,... , -k ..0- :'-/ .' ligtt•.,,,,-,;,_,,-„..,, •,--.5-,g---4.•-;-. ;.-204:21.:-:,....-., • tzli.-;''-'I' - . . i•e'_2'4::,1-trit...;•••I'iiit-:•• ___,e4...;4,-iiset — ..: 7. .,.. . ,,."•••,:Y 5:44rilt,. '4F:tf--'4...-t '- • .1:-- j--••. -. r:4-:1,,i,:..-!..:---1•49911/..... 4'.7. 1.-,...4--.. .k.' .. •-.:.,;,,5,-,- --'.. • 1 :... -'1».:-:•.? , -°•:,-;-*- - c-,..s.-,,i4i.4.4-',4.%;-41.,1„,41.6.11,..t.t•-:.:,1,--.4.* 1..0 - - •-,-----.).....7-•.-1.47t.r.:-,.,_- . thcti ,- -1f.:-.--..k.,,,..... -. :.::...__. f • • _ ._ • - * •-1' ' V-&Le1/.. A .svitlE /c3c);c: •.. •__ •... . .. . y -. . - 1-- ereby certify that this is a true and correct representation 01 a suivey.01 theboundafies of ....-7--r-- -.•-•.- ow,'dava#0---..--,-;:•••k:'..,e4, -.:,,.,ixl,L,-'':,:,..• .,TZ-'•, . r. ,-;',.. •i- . .4.....fittcutni;inti. ' •Is and Ot tna I. oft of all buildings thereon.and all : -••!. . -;.,.i ..........-„L-:•,-„.• ,-:-...--:"..- ::. ....• 1,--•!...7...- !..,:..••:;e-,• •,i ;,,,., .... --,:,,,--....„,f,,, 7,,,.... 1..--.165 .-.; --,,,, ,. ,.... ,:: , .. e3193' • •. ..' , . ; .'; visible aniroachntisnts-Af iny•iron oion said land•SCirveivd.Win,. - -:-.....••• , ,..•-,.. - , ,-.-• --,-• • .,.. ,7. -..... .../.• i•-:-.....-,,;. - ,.. -2,-, -ii.'- ‘-=-.NZ•-•.iAt,- -V'.W t.-"••••.,4-,..,.,,::::,.. 41t 't:....:^-.. -::, , :‘ ''':'..!.r::.:ce e.4 ."W-,'..'.". •-•.,y_ ;-•;.4....-"•_•..,•r.-? .•-•-.*; Ag-.,;.f.c.; ,-:$)t ic,e,...--,...*:., -`,1-•tr:I.:c 't.•Q;•; ' • m. ..,..e., +;. --.'"1.e - z k• :&,. '..2-.'it,t :...,r, ..-,••••••,0,-.'1‘.;,--• •4.,' •• r rr''ref.; ":1-4/ r,..A.,3•-•,'',„.t-,:ir..:1,..:.. I ;'.: ',-..", ''.-z.,' • ,..•'-'..' '.;' :;.. '•-:*--4-::. .','t;'-';•:--`,- '---'.4r, :.::-: '.4;1 tt. ":4, '..,...::: - '!-',..,!- .t_-_-•'4,4,;-..;e:..,::k.t4..;t, ,: ,.: A 111041) '4,-:*i Agntli:i.,.;•-• .‘;...4,-.,""--,t.,..'1„.....'.;. '. -.-• .. ,.1 - -: ,,,.;..;-' -; '.....t.....-.1..14:,.; -.%_..„0-,....,-.:,,,,,,, ).,%-,,,.0.1.44.:..r;k:.:‘.,..;;;;.....,...--,,,,,, .4.4.-',.E.:;'-q--, 44-'..,./:4`•-- .1---1.1.-%. a- .,,w,,-.1 -• - - -; .--, .., -'- . --...............:_...:., :-...;-:,.. s.,',,,,,,:,,T-E.-1.-,,;17-..*4,1,.. .,-•;?-,.‘ :;.,.1.---:‘,.:•.,:-:•,,-.712',r7.-.4'.'!...'.;01.q.,: 't•-•` ;„ .. -"iPS0 _ .. ,......:.......,e; • '‘ef.‘,,.., -ogicRu_ ::-ilitAS OCIA.TES;INC..,--:.'. i:•-•.,-,,.-.-,.. k.. .,:e.~1_,.........e...-.t7.... .....,..,:i4 4:47:-.-....+'"?..v.- 1-.0...:A._.4..--!-fi.,..1,.......:4-1.4,•tv,:.t:!.'1;;;.4.1.14.41i.. ,r' 4..e. _ 1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS 1 f _I� TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1997 at 6:00 p.m. City Hall - 690 Coulter Drive 416 Council Chambers Lake Riley SUBJECT: Rear Yard Setback Variance for Construction of a Pool APPLICANT: Laura Evans LOCATION: 331 Deerfoot Trail NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant, Laura Evans, is requesting an 18 foot variance to the 30 foot rear yard setback to allow the construction of a pool on property zoned RSF and located at 331 Deerfoot Trail. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Cindy at 937-1900 ext. 117. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on June 5, 1997. ROBERT & DORIS ROGERS DENNIS R & ANN BAKER LUCILLE LOUISE REMUS 4917 DIANE DR 9219 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9245 LAKE RILEY BLVD MF 7TONKA, MN 55343 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DONALD & KATHRYN SITTER EUNICE ELIZABETH KOTTKE JEFFREY P & HEIDI S NELSON 9249 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9221 LAKE RILEY BLVD 300 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 PETER PEMRICK JR & WENDY L EGGERS ALAN & KAREN DIRKS ROBERT D & KRISTIN S REBERTUS 9251 KIOWA TRL 331 DEERFOOT TRL 320 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JAMES F & PATRICIA M DOLEJSI GEORGE B DEWITT PAMELA N GUYER 9260 KIOWA TRL 3127 4TH ST SE 340 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55414 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MICHAEL & CRYSTAL SCHACHTERLE RONALD YTZEN DANIEL M & JEAN CHRISTENSEN 6350 DOGWOOD AVE 9227 LAKE RILEY BLVD 360 DEERFOOT TRL EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JAMES LEE HENDRICKSON FREDERICK POTTHOFF III & JUDITH C KEVIN M & LINDA P SHARKEY 9131 LAKE RILEY BLVD POTTHOFF 380 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9231 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ALAN H & KAREN L DIRKS JOHN W ARDOYNO PAUL E & GAIL A TERRY 9203 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9235 LAKE RILEY BLVD 400 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 LELAND G SAPP & DIANE K TAYLOR C/O PAUL KENT OLSON RICHARD R & JILL M MADORE CERIDIAN EMPLOYER SERVICES 9239 LAKE RILEY BLVD 381 DEERFOOT TRL 5354 PARKDALE DR #200 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 CURTIS G KRIER SUNNYSLOPE HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/O LESLIE SCOTT ALAN WIRTH 9211 LAKE RILEY BLVD TIDSTROM 361 DEERFOOT TRL 340 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 GORY L & KELLY R HASTINGS JOY A TANNER STEVEN A & PATRICIA A SEKELY 9217 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9243 LAKE RILEY BLVD 341 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHRISTOPHER T MCGRATH & CHRISTINE M MCGRATH 5829 OLINGER RD • EDINA, MN 55436 KENT TAGE RAMLIDEN & NAOMI • KAHN-RAMLIDEN 321 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DALE B & DIANE KUTTER 301 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 SUNNYSLOPE HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/O LESLIE TIDSTROM 340 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DALE L & RANDI E BOYER STEVEN A & RENEE WILLIAMS DAVID P & KAREN L DAOUST 9005 LAKE RILEY BLVD 7600 HERITAGE RD 9470 FOXFORD RD C" HASSEN, MN 55317 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55346 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 BENJAMIN E & PATRICIA SWENSON SCOTT A & SUSAN M BABCOCK RICHARD A & JOANNE M LAMETTRY 9015 LAKE RILEY RD 8570 MAGNOLIA TRL-APT 112 9490 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 NORMAN C JR & KIMBERLY GRANT PETER C & GEORGE-ANN LILLIE DENNIS M MILLS 9021 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9355 KIOWA TRL 9510 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ELDON & RAE JEAN BERKLAND RICHARD C BLUMENSTEIN & JILL RICHARD J CHADWICK 9261 KIOWA TRL KEOUGH BLUMENSTEIN 9530 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9361 KIOWA TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DONALD & KATHRYN SITTER JOHN W & BEVERLY J BELL LAKE RILEY WOODS HOMEOWNERS 9249 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9371 KIOWA TRL 1660 HWY 100 S SUITE 428 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 BARRY A & HARRIET F BERSHAW MARK A & PAMELA K MOKSNES DAVID 0 HANSEN 9271 KIOWA TRL 9381 KIOWA TRL 108 PIONEER TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 PETER PEMRICK JR & WENDY L EGGERS JOYCE E KING WILLIAM T & CAROL ANN GRAY 9251 KIOWA TRL 9391 KIOWA TRL 50 PIONEER TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 WILLIAM J O'NEILL WILLIAM L & LINDA C JANSEN STEPHEN L WHITEHILL 9550 FOXFORD RD 240 EASTWOOD CT 7001 DAKOTA AVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CRAIG W & KATHRYN HALVERSON WILLIAM S HENAK & KRISTIN ALLERS MICHAEL 0 DOGWOOD CRYSTAL SCHACHTERLE 9283 KIOWA TRL 280 EASTWOOD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 CRAIGRA W & KATHRYN HALVERSON WILLIAM S HENAK & KRISTIN ALLERS SSTE1EN NEF & ATHLEEN M BURKE 9283 KIOWA TRL 280 EASTWOOD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 WILLIAM & SHARON PREDOVICH RICHARD D & FRIEDA A OLIN RONALD YTZEN 9611 MEADOWLARK LN 9125 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9227 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 '""44. RICHARD P VOGEL JAMES LEE HENDRICKSON FREDERICK POTTHOFF III & JUDITH C 105 PIONEER TRL 9131 LAKE RILEY BLVD POTTHOFF CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9231 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MICHAEL T & TERESA A MONK ALAN H & KAREN L DIRKS JOHN W ARDOYNO 9671 MEADOW LARK LN 9203 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9235 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MICHAEL J & LISA A REILLY LELAND G SAPP & DIANE K TAYLOR C/O PAUL KENT OLSON 2305 INDIAN RIDGE DR CERIDIAN EMPLOYER SERVICES 9239 LAKE RILEY BLVD GLENVIEW, IL 60025 5354 PARKDALE DR #200 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 SUNNYSLOPE HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/O LESI DELBERT R & NANCY R SMITH CURTIS G KRIER TIDSTROM 9051 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9211 LAKE RILEY BLVD 340 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RAYMOND M & JUDITH N LEWIS GREGORY L & KELLY R HASTINGS JOY A TANNER 9071 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9217 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9243 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ROBERT H & CHERYL A PETERSON DENNIS R & ANN BAKER LUCILLE LOUISE REMUS 9101 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9219 LAKE RILEY BLVD 9245 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JAMES L TONJES C/O GENERAL MILLS INC-B BARNES EUNICE ELIZABETH KOTTKE PO BOX 1113 9221 LAKE RILEY BLVD MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55440 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 J P JR & JUDITH M HUNGELMANN ALAN & KAREN DIRKS 9117 LAKE RILEY BLVD 331 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JOHN B JR & MARLYN G GOULETT GEORGE B DEWITT 9119 LAKE RILEY BLVD 3127 4TH ST SE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55414 BOA DATE: 6/17/97 CITY OF k • CUAUA! EN CC DATE: CASE #: 97-5 Variance • By: Al-Jaff/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: A 45 Foot Setback Variance from a Natural Wetland to Construct a Deck LOCATION: 491 Trap Line Lane APPLICANT: Roger and Gail Stech 491 Trap Line Lane V Chanhassen, MN (612)470-4473 a 0 PRESENT ZONING: PUD-R, Planned Unit Development Residential ACREAGE: 1.48 acres DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N-Vacant residential - City of Shorewood S -PUD, single family E PUD, single family Q W -PUD, single family WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. CI PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site is adjacent to a Natural wetland. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential Stech Variance June 17, 1997 Page 2 BACKGROUND On February 8, 1984, the City Council approved the final plat for Chestnut Ridge Phase H. Setbacks from the natural wetland appear to not have been taken into consideration when the depth of those lots were approved. The ordinance required a 75 foot setback from the edge of the natural wetland. In June, 1988, the City approved a building permit for a house for the subject residence to be built approximately 45 feet from the edge of the natural wetland. Again, we are uncertain as to why the variance situation was not caught during review of the building permit. On July 23, 1990, the owner of the property applied for a variance to construct a porch and a deck on the site. The same setback variance was also requested. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals approved the variance, subject to conditions. The decision was appealed to the City Council. The City Council approved the variance. Variances are valid for one year. If substantial work is not performed within one year, the variance will be rendered null and void. The applicant did not construct the deck and the variance expired. The home was sold to a new party (Mr. and Mrs. Stech). They wish to construct a deck only with an identical foot print to that which was approved on July 23, 1990. Since the variance has expired, the applicant must go through the process again, .,� hence the variance application. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-406 (b) of the City Code states that all structures must maintain a 75 foot setback from a Natural wetland for lots of record created before December 14, 1992. ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to build a deck within 30 feet of a Natural wetland. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 75 foot setback. The rear elevation of the house shows 3 sliding doors that were put there for the purpose of constructing a future deck. Errors appear to have been made by the City that resulted in the creation of a lot that was difficult, if not impossible, to build upon without a variance. The error was compounded by approval of a building permit which resulted in the construction of a home without obtaining a variance. At the time these actions were taken, staff was working under enormous pressure being both shorthanded and faced with a large number of development proposals. Since that time a number of administrative changes have been undertaken to hopefully eliminate this problem and the City has since adopted methods to improve wetland identification. A variance may be granted by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals or City Council only if all of the following criteria are met: Stech Variance June 17, 1997 Page 3 a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances but to recognize that and develop neighborhoods pre-existing standards exist. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. * Staff conducted a survey within the 500 feet of the surrounding area and discovered that the 6 houses that abut the wetland, 3 have setbacks less than 75 feet, while the other 3 have either 75 feet or more. The 3 residences that are located within the 75 foot setback area were approved under the following conditions: Lot 2, Block 3 - Did not appear in front of the Planning Department but was approved by the Building Department only. Lot 4, Block 3 - Shows the wetland as a utility and drainage easement on the registered land survey, therefore, it was approved under that condition. The subject residence, which is located on Lot 5, Block 3, has an extremely small buildable area. The setback dimensions were overlooked by staff and the building permit was approved. All 5 residences surrounding the subject property have existing decks and 50%of those properties are encroaching on the wetland setback. Therefore, granting the variance will allow the subject property to blend with these existing standards without departing downward from them (Attachment #1). In addition, we note that the home on this site is comparable with others in the neighborhood and that a deck is considered to be a reasonable amenity. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally,to other property within the same zoning classification. * The conditions upon which this petition for a variance is based is not applicable generally to other properties within the same zoning classification outside of the immediate area. c. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. * This does not appear to be the case. The applicant is simply attempting to utilize the parcel for the single family residential uses it was approved for. Stech Variance —� June 17, 1997 Page 4 d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self created hardship. * The hardship is not self created. The hardship began when the City made the decision to approve the lot as a buildable lot. Parcel size and setback measurements where overlooked when approving the plat. Since the year 1989, staff has been reviewing building plans for proposed residences and locating any sliding doors that might be used for a future deck and alerting the homeowner as to whether they may be able to build a deck depending on the setbacks of the home to the property line. Staff has also been working to clarify wetland locations both during platting and building permit review. e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare of injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. * The granting of the variance will not be detrimental or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. The deck and porch will be located within 30 feet of the Class B wetland and will be constructed above the high water mark. The wetland is heavily protected by existing vegetation and staff feels comfortable with allowing a deck and a porch to be constructed within 30 feet of the edge of the wetland. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increases the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. * The granting of the variance will allow a deck and porch to be constructed at a reasonable distance from the adjoining properties. Therefore, it will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to those properties, nor will it increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. RECOMMENDATION For the above findings, staff is recommending the following motion: The Board of Adjustments and Appeals approves Variance 97-5 for a 45 foot setback variance from a natural wetland for the construction of a deck with the following condition: 1. The applicant uses Type 111 erosion control along the edge of the wetland. -� • Stech Variance June 17, 1997 Page 5 ATTACHMENTS 1. Plat map showing existing setbacks from the edge of the wetland. 2. Site plan showing proposed deck. 3. Application. SI/4 cor of I • Sec.36. • I Y.C ; •�-... ----- �I 2 OF CHOHASS .••��__ i•'i9.73- 5 GOV'T CF+AIN -a \ 15 1 , P55 ;:Z ; 3 ;� I 4 o s J 1i I _ uCC. 5 432 1� in lo to' I i I Q y '�� TRA IPER W , � � ,3i o�` I I S ' p., SS C 1f4 I o 6► 6 a 8 ' ; 7 6 `. OUTLOT :b1 y 1 5 A ° TAp: 4t3, Z•ZI It b 1 13B1 36 I 3�►1 4 3 a ��� vN� I 3z1 E T R A !PERS P ti 3 4 F 1 2 / 5 I 4 2 )on I ii&i; 1t60 430 /. I AT NEAR \c _ Jl • 4 f / SS _ \ ? -----............)..).1...., N i \ / I 'q . u( ,rL T- j; , /\ l y fie `j` I` '' �C�_O/� -qA / (2 , 2 ,, BUT • Lor c /w1 ,` -_ I �j� / u5 \. 111"r4iP RESIDENTIAL SERVICES Complete Custom Remodeling and Home Office Solutions Since 1979 5 nt•E .--PL \ ; 1 f)t it sf t \ If. S f ; k \, �6C.1L 1`'NO3 �► �- � 1. Z. — — 1 "'� ---\---\ 3° ..y ".s �err,w1 \-çD1.“:•Jse C' 1 U.X > -ILA IS LAAS ALE I" ; L4p' PHIS.-.,RKEGAARD DESIGNER/BUILDER 3941 COLGATE AVENUE MINNETONKA,MN 55345 CONTRACTOR LICENSE#:6033 FAX:404-1380 Ri I INFSS'404-1380 6N.) l f c- 1 UP, - �tf 1 L (�f retL F_6/� -r2� 5 J;z��c /�C� 1 �—� UI-( - Sr_c2viC<<- U CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612)937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: t��"-�� T'c;Ni�re 91c, c7t c� OWNER: Imo - f c� : �-41L S7`Fr'h� ADDRESS: �g/ %� �'�r iE c— 4.v:, ADDRESS: TELEPHONE (Day time) 6'7G L//73 TELEPHONE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit — Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit Variance Non-conforming Use Permit _ Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development* _ Zoning Appeal Rezoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Notification Sign Site Plan Review* X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) Subdivision* TOTAL FEE$ A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. 'Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8/"X 11" reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE-When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME F--a le_ 7 ,6) I T,0r�.l LOCATION LI Ci l t 2 A pc_ l 'v L A r-v�'' LEGAL DESCRIPTION TOTAL ACREAGE WETLANDS PRESENT ?C YES NO PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION • REASON FOR THIS REQUEST \, _�c--; 7 ='/\-' v i r '7 `=., 'i /_' aC it 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, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written ,,otice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. 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 have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed 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. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of myknowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. ��a 3/q 7 Sig of plican re of signatur f Fee Owner Dat aopliication Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. he applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted,a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. INS c2/c. Z-1-Ag'S 1 c�6,2S e5,\/ /y!42/.J c.r-u G i'V :,;/vow/_I 7-w.f - �,e(G ie.)" L ✓�c)/(_L),E/ /VAC l�C //� `'�%�i GCF/� / f/h +L7 CfC'sO 7/71 -- C'A?(0 /w C Cic✓/I/ .2ee),' // 7 7%52 i" r ? f T17`i Uvc-N T(t2 ,eG lc /v i fi°` ivyTcArv0) /3e) - A-70 o✓ lJ'C.z ' cat r ?GCld-O Lj�ft�C�' '�'7i�S �NC/ TY F 5.._ . $<7"-C1/477fie./ //V 7r/ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING / BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS = AND APPEALS . 1_ -,fir =-1r.� r pass \,<Y \ ��''.- 2,._ A( l T Trap ens J l SDAY JUNE 17, 1997 X `` ;A,,-�' -_ -}v/// ' ' TU E c, �x \ �- ,< ... ; at 6:00 , t�/ � NearM un City Hall - 690 Coulter Drive - �y�y'7 7//l, y ,N Pleasant View Ro Council Chambers ' /'7 %'// SUBJECT: Variance to Construct Deck - . . within the 75 foot Wetland Setback - _ I- „/-:'.':::,7,'',k \,,„\,- --\\ u n APPLICANT: Roger and Gail Stech LOCATION: 491 Trapline Lane NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicants, Roger and Gail Stech, is requesting a variance to allow the construction of a deck within the 75 foot wetland setback on property zoned PUD and located at 491 Trapline Lane. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Sharmin at 937-1900 ext. 120. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on June 5, 1997. CITY OF CHANHASSEN C/O CITY TREASURER DONALD W & JEWEL K HASEK ROGER L & GAYLE D STECK OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 690 COULTER DR PO BOX 147 6310 STAGHORN DR 491 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CITY OF CHANHASSEN C/O CITY TREASURER GRADY M FERGUSON & SANDRA HUGHES ANDREW J REUL & JENNIFER SIX OR CURRENT RESIDENT FERGUSON OR CURRENT RESIDENT 690 COULTER DR PO BOX 147 OR CURRENT RESIDENT 500 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 6311 STAGHORN LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DWAYNE R & FRANCINE SIGLER MARK J & TERRY J DENUCCI GERALD & CANDICE CRANDALL OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6397 OXBOW BND 6301 SUMMIT CIR 501 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DANIEL & VIRGINIA B ANDERSON DALE A & DIANNA K FEHRENBACH DUANE L & MARCIA E MCCONKEY OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6399 OXBOW BND 421 TRAPLINE LN 401 TRAPPERS PASS CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JOHN C & GERIANNE MANN THOMAS L & ELLEN C MARSH DAVID E & JUDY J BENDA OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6401 OXBOW BND 430 TRAPLINE LN 411 TRAPPERS PASS CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 FRANK J MESSINA JR & ROSEMARY M JOHN W & LINDA L MICHAEL JAMES J & KAREN D'AMBRISI MESSINA OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 431 TRAPLINE LN 6321 STAGHORN LN 6403 OXBOW BND CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 TIMOTHY P & JEANNE M PIETRINI J JEFFREY RUEGEMER & COLLEEN D OR CURRENT RESIDENT RUEGEMER 6405 OXBOW BND OR CURRENT RESIDENT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 460 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JAMES A & JUDITH E EARNSHAW DONALD E & MARY A JACOBY OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6407 OXBOW BND 461 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 R DAVID & JOYCE E SUBERVILLE AARON J & SHEILA K ROTH OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6408 OXBOW BND 480 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CYNTHIA G FRENCH ROBERT A & LINDA J HARRINGTON OR CURRENT RESIDENT OR CURRENT RESIDENT 6300 STAGHORN LN 481 TRAPLINE LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CHANHASSEN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPPEALS REGULAR MEETING MAY 20, 1997 Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Willard Johnson, Carol Watson and Steve Berquist STAFF PRESENT: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II and Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner I A REQUEST FOR A 6.5 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 25 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK, RICK AND DEE ANN HALE, 600 FOX HILL ROAD. Cynthia Kirchoff presented the staff report. Dee Ann Hale stated that their home is located in Carver Beach where older homes exist closer to the front property line than in newer subdivisions. She explained that their family activities take place in the front yard. She stated that it is difficult to move large items in and out of the home because the interior is poorly designed. She stated that a 14 foot-deck is a reasonable request and a 10 foot deck is too small. Steve Berquist stated that buying a house can be difficult as the layout may not be as you would like. He asked if the deck would be used as an entry. Dee Ann Hale stated that it would and that a large deck would make the space more usable. She stated that the deck would enhance and bring enjoyment to their property. Berquist asked if building on the eastern side of the home would be feasible. Dee Ann Hale stated that the builder did not recommend building on the east side or the back door. Rick Hale stated that a 10.5 foot deck would still be usable, however, a 12 or 14 foot deck would be better. Berquist stated that the he would recommend that this deck maintain the neighborhood standards. Rick Hale stated that others in the neighborhood have far worse conditions and encroachments. Carol Watson asked if the applicant would want a 10.5 foot deck. Rick Hale stated that they would. Willard Johnson stated that he agrees with the staff recommendation for a 3 foot variance from the front yard setback. Board of Adjustments and Appeals Meeting Minutes .� May 20, 1997 Page 2 Watson moved, Johnson seconded a motion to deny the 6.5 foot variance from the front yard setback for a deck and motioned to approve a 3 foot variance. The motions carried with a vote of 3 to O. Berquist asked if a 12 foot deck would be appropriate. Johnson stated that he does not believe that they should allow them to encroach further into the setback. Berquist stated that Fox Hill Road will not be widened in the future and that other cities have relaxed setbacks for mature neighborhoods. • Watson stated that their goal is to improve Carver Beach by improving situations that occurred prior to our current zoning ordinance. She stated that many of the properties in this area do not meet current requirements. Berquist stated that the 12 foot deck would lessen the chaos and make the deck more functional. Johnson stated that allowing a 12 foot deck would mean setting new standards. Watson stated that there is order to what the Board does and that they should keep in compliance with the ordinance and maintain existing standards. Rich Hale stated that many residents do not go through the process like they have done. Dee Ann Hale stated that she was told by her neighbors to just build the deck without going through the process or applying for a building permit. She stated that the neighbors do not care nor does she care what the neighbors do with their property. Watson stated that residents do care what their neighbors do when it comes time to sell their home. Johnson stated that they have removed decks that were constructed illegally. Berquist stated that the Board is going through the process just like the applicant. Sharmin Al-Jaff was questioned about a variance that was granted to the neighbor of the subject property. She stated that this variance allowed them to build an addition 22 feet from the front yard setback and was designed around pre-existing standards within 500 feet of the property as required by ordinance.