The URL can be used to link to this page

CAS-22_SCHERLE, DAVID & JULIECity of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 M1 OF (952) 227-1100 com To: David and Julie Scherle 8541 Flamingo Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Invoice SALESPERSON DATE TERMS — t I KTM 9/20/07 upon receipt QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNITPRICE I AMOUNT� 69 $3.00 $207.00 1 Property Owners List within 500'of 8541 Flamingo Drive (69 labels) 00 TOTAL DUE $207.00 NOTE: This invoice is in accordance with the Development Review Application submitted to the City by the Addressee shown above (copy attached) and must be paid prior to the public heariml scheduled for October 2. 2007. Make all checks payable to: City of Chanhassen Please write the following code on your check: Planning Case #07-22. If you have any questions concerning this invoice, call: (952)-227-1107. THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN P 0 BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 09/25/2007 3:47 PM Receipt No. 0053257 CLERK: katie PAYEE: DAVID/JULIE SCHERLE 8541 FLAMINGO DRIVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PLANNING CASE 07-22 ------------------------------------------------------- GIS List 207.00 Total Cash Check 6321 Change ----------- 207.00 0.00 207.00 ----------- 0.00 SCANNED 0-7 - 2 Z - CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND ACTION IN RE: Application of David and Julie Scherle for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance for the addition of a shed — Planning Case No. 07-22. On October 2, 2007, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the Application of David and Julie Scherle for 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance for the addition of a shed at 8541 Flamingo Drive, located in the Planned Unit Development Residential District (PUD -R) at Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition. The Planning Commission conducted a public healing on the proposed variance that was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I . The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development Residential (PUD -R). 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential — Low Density (Net Density Range 1.2 — 4u/Acre). 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition. 4. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recornmend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a. The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, and a two -car garage are constructed on the property. An alternate storage area could be constructed and comply with City Code. b. The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the PUDR zoning district. All properties within the Lake Susan Hills West development must maintain a 10 foot side yard setback. When the subdivision was platted in 1987, the developer had to demonstrate that a 60 by 60 house pad could fit on each lot with in the required setbacks. c. The purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. d. The alleged hardship of encroaching into the side yard setback is a self-created hardship. The desire for the proposed shed is based on the purchase of a motorcycle and indoor storage. An accessory building is allowed within the buildable area provided it meets the SCANNED V zoning requirements. The applicant has reasonable use of the property, a single family house and a two car garage, as well as another shed in the rear yard of the property. The proposed variance is for convenience, rather than necessity. e. The variance maybe detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Since the shed crowds the common property line to the North and reducing the required separation between buildings. f. The proposed variation may impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, due to the close proximity of the structure to the property line. 5. The planning report #07-22 Variance dated October 2, 2007, prepared by Angie Auseth, et al, is incorporated herein. ACTION "The Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-22, for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 -foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4 Block 1, Lake Susan I -Ells West 56' Addition, based on the findings of fact in the staff report. The Planning Commission further directs that: 1. The applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod." ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 2nd day of October, 2007. CHANHASSEN PLANNING 1M. gAplan\20G7 planning �s\07-22 schffle varianc6finclings of fact-doc Building Inspections EXECUTIVE SUM[MARY O'I—ZZ- Fax: 952.227.1190 4 Engineering MEMORANDUM Phone 952.227.1160 TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Cfff OF FROM: Angie Auseth, Planner I CWNSEN City Council approval requires a majority of City Council present. Fax: 952.227.1110 DATE: October 22, 2007 k-10. 7700 Market Boulevard Fax: 952.227.1110 PC Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 SUBJ: Scherle Variance Request — 8541 Flamingo Drive 2310 Coulter Boulevard Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan MIN West 5hAddition Administration Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning Case #07-22 Phone: 952.227.1100 maintain the 10 -foot side yard setback and the drainage and utility easement. They also Planning & Fax, 952.227.1110 Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 path to the storm sewer. The Planning Commission was concerned that approval of the variance Building Inspections EXECUTIVE SUM[MARY Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 The applicant is appealing the denial of their variance request for an after -the -fact 7 -foot 3 -inch Engineering side yard setback for the addition of a shed. Phone 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 ACTION REQUIRED Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 City Council approval requires a majority of City Council present. Fax: 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation PLANNING COMMSSION SUM[M[ARY Phone. 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 2, 2007. The Planning Recreation Center Commission voted three for and one against themotion, denying the setback variance. 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952,227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 The Planning Cominission discussed moving the shed to the rear yard behind the garage to maintain the 10 -foot side yard setback and the drainage and utility easement. They also Planning & discussed the importance of the drainage and utility easement, which is to allow storm water a Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 path to the storm sewer. The Planning Commission was concerned that approval of the variance Fax� 952.227.1110 could lead to a lack of separation between adjacent buildings. By granting this variance a precedent could be set to grant other properties setback variances and reduce or possibly Public 1I 1591 Park Road eliminate a drainage and utility easement and create a flooding situation. Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 The Planning Commission suggested the applicant work with staff to come up with an Senior Center alternative location for the shed that meets city ordinances; the applicant has decided to proceed Phone: 952.227.1125 with the original setback variance request. Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site The Planning Commission minutes for October 2, 2007 are attached to this report. www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the motion as specified on page 6 in the staff report dated October 2, 2007 denying the side yard setback variance with the conditions outlined in the staff report and adopt the attached Findings of Fact. The City of Chan In ass an -A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a channing downtown, thriving businesses, winding trai Is, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. Todd Gerhardt ScherIeVariance October 22, 2007 Page 2 ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter from David and Julie Scherle Appealing Planning Commission Denial. 2. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 3. Planning Commission Staff Report Dated October 2,2007. 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated October 2, 2007. W.Npl=\2007 phmning �\07-22 �hale vafi�m\exmufive summarydm October 5, 2007 Planning Commission City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Scherle Variance Planning Case 07-22 Dear Sir/Madam: This is to notify you that we would like to appeal the decision made on our variance request for a side yard setback on the construction of a shed on our property at 8541 Flamingo Drive; Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 50'Addition. Thank you, David Scherle Ju ' Scherle CM1 OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED OCT 0 5 2007 CHANHASSEN PLANNINO DEpT SCANNO CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND ACTION IN RE: Application of David and Julie Scherle for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance for the addition of a shed — Planning Case No. 07-22. On October 22, 2007, the Chanhassen City Council met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the Appeal of David and Julie Scherle for 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance for the addition of a shed at 8541 Flamingo Drive, located in the Planned Unit Development Residential District (PUD -R) at Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition, which had been denied at the October 2, 2007 Planning Commission meeting. The City Council reviewed the October 2, 2007 Planning Commission minutes, heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development Residential (PUD -R). 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential — Low Density (Net Density Range 1.2 — 4u/Acre). 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition. 4. 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. The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, and a two -car garage are constructed on the property. An alternate storage area could be constructed and comply with City Code. b. The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the PUDR zoning district. All properties within the Lake Susan Hills West development must maintain a 10 foot side yard setback. When the subdivision was platted in 1987, the developer had to demonstrate that a 60 by 60 house pad could fit on each lot with in the required setbacks. c. The purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. d. The alleged hardship of encroaching into the side yard setback is a self-created hardship. The desire for the proposed shed is based on the purchase of a motorcycle and indoor storage. An accessory building is allowed within the buildable area provided it meets the zoning requirements. The applicant has reasonable use of the property, a single family house and a two car garage, as well as another shed in the rear yard of the property. The proposed variance is for convenience, rather than necessity. e. The variance maybe detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Since the shed crowds the common property line to the North and reducing the required separation between buildings. The proposed variation may impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, due to the close proximity of the structure to the property line. 5. The planning report #07-22 Variance dated October 2, 2007, prepared by Angie Auseth, et a], is incorporated herein. ACTION "The City Council denies Planning Case 07-22, for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 -foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4 Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5"' Addition, based on the findings of fact in the staff report. The City Council further directs that: 1. The applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod." ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council on this 22�d day of October, 2007. CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL M Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor gAplan\2007 p1anningcases\07-22 scherle variance\cc findings of fact doc STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for an after -the -fact 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the 10 - foot side yard setback requirement for the addition of a shed. LOCATION: 8541 Flamingo Drive Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan lElls West 50'Addition APPLICANT: David and Julie Scherle 8541 Flamingo Drive Chanhassen, NIN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit Development Residential (PUDR) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density ACREAGE: 0.33 acres DENSITY: NA SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a 2 -foot 9 -inch side yard setback for the construction of a shed. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi judicial decision. Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 2 of 6 PROPOSAL SUNUAARY The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 2 -foot 9 -inch side yard setback. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 10 -foot side yard setback on all properties in the Lake Susan Mlls Subdivision. The property is zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential Single Family (PUD - R). It is located on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5d' Addition west of Powers Boulevard. 0 a- M'1-11*01 The applicant received a "Stop Work Order" issued by a City building inspector, as it was obvious that the shed did not meet the 10 -foot side yard setback requirement. The applicant came to City Hall and inquired about the setback and then applied for a variance. Upon inspection of the property on September 6, 2007, staff noticed that the amount of impervious surface on the property clearly exceeded the hard surface coverage maximum allowed in that development. Staff notified the applicant of the impervious surface maximum requirement and the applicant worked with staff to bring the impervious surface coverage into compliance. The applicant began constniction of the shed because he purchased a larger motorcycle and no longer had space in his two -car garage to house it. This is a self-created hardship. Staff is recommending denial of the applicant's request based on the fact that the applicant has reasonable use of the property. Reasonable use is defined as a single-family home with a two -car garage, which is currently constructed on the property. There are alternative locations for the shed. One alternative is to locate the shed behind the garage rather than on the side. This would eliminate the need for a variance. Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 3 of 6 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS • Chapter 20, Division 3, Variances • Lake Susan Hills West PUD Development Contract • Section 20-506 (b) Standards and guidelines for single-family detached residential PUD, Minimum lot size * Section 20-615 (6) RSF District Requirements; Setbacks BACKGROUND The property is located on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5h Addition, which is zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R). The subject property has an area of 14,374.8 square feet. It has a lot frontage of 69 feet and an average depth of 156.09 feet. Minimum lot dimensions required by ordinance are an average of 15,000 square -foot lot size for the entire PUD, 90 -foot lot frontage and 100 -foot lot depth. Since discussion between staff and the homeowner began, the applicant has reduced the hardcover on the property to bring it into compliance with city code. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the 10 -foot side yard setback requirement for the addition of a shed attached to the north side of his garage. The shed is 6 -feet 3 -inches by 20 -feet 5 -inches, which would require a 3 -foot 9 -inch variance, but the eaves of the garage overhang 12 inches off the side of the shed. Eaves, generally, may encroach 2 feet 6 inches into a required setback when the structure meets the 10 -foot required setback. However, if a variance is requested, then the allowed eave encroachment no longer applies to the property. The eave overhang must be part of the variance request, resulting in a setback of 2 feet 9 inches, rather than 3 feet 9 inches. While the footprint and eaves of the shed extend 7 feet 3 inches into the setback, the shed has a net floor area less than 120 square feet. Therefore, the structure does not have to meet building code requirements and does not require a building permit. However, all improvements must meet zoning regulations such as setback requirements, drainage and utility easement encroachment and hard surface coverage requirements. The applicant constructed the shed without contacting the City or the City's website and received a Stop Work Order from one of the City's building inspectors. A Residential Zoning Permit acts as a safety net to identify prior to construction any potential code violations, including but not limited to setbacks and hard surface coverage requirements. This permit is at no cost to the homeowner and allows the City and the homeowner an opportunity to correct any encroachments or violation before installation begins. It is the contractor/homeowner's responsibility to contact the City prior to construction and obtain a Residential Zoning Permit to ensure compliance with City Code. Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 4 of 6 Staff called Gopher State for a locate to determine whether any public utilities were in the drainage and utility easement; none were identified in that easement. Site Characteristics The applicant currently has a shed in the rear yard as well as a two -car garage which could house the motorcycle. There are not topographical or pre-existing characteristics on the site that would constitute undue hardship or the need for a variance. The homeowner has worked diligently to remove much of the hard cover on the property to comply with the impervious surface requirement: an accessory driveway, concrete behind proposed shed, shed behind garage, retaining wall along removed driveway, and retaining wall around garden. Permitted Use The site is zoned PUD -R, Planned Unit Development -Residential. The Lake Susan Hills West PUD development contract approved November 19, 1987 states that "Single family lots shall be developed in accordance with the uses, standards, and requirements of the RSF (Single Family Residential) Zoning District." Reasonable use of a property within the RSF district is a single- family home with a two -car garage, which is currently constructed on the property. An accessory structure to store vehicles is not considered to be a necessity. Accessory structures are permitted provided they meet the zoning requirements for that lot/development. A shed could be built behind the garage. However, the applicant would have to remove more impervious surface to allow for this addition. The shed for which the variance has been applied for is currently on a concrete slab, which could be removed allowing the necessary square footage for a separate shed addition. VARIANCES WITHIN 500 FEET There are no variance requests for properties within 500 feet of the subject property. There were four variance requests within the Lake Susan Hills West Subdivision located on the west side of Powers Boulevard: CASE # ADDRESS REQUEST DECISION & CONDITION 98-10 1520 Heron Drive 28 -foot front yard setback for a Approved: pool (2' Variance) screen bottom of pool 22 -foot rear yard setback for Approved: 99-05 8451 Pelican Court three -season porch on existing demonstrate existing deck can support deck (8' Variance) porch without structural changes 02-01 1420 Heron Drive 23 -foot front yard setback for a Approved: third garage stall (T Variance) No Conditions Approved: 36.7% Hard Surface Coverage 1) Work with city forester for additional 03-06 8632 Flamingo Drive for accessory structures trees and/or shrubs 2) no future conversion other than to green space Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 5 of 6 Should the Planning Gemmiss City Council approve a variance, the following issues must be addressed: the applicant must get an encroachment agreement to be within the drainage and utility easement; and the applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod. This could set a precedent within the neighborhood, and findings of fact would need to be created to support the approval. FINDINGS The Manning GonwAssion 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 these criteria. Finding: The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, and a two -car garage are constructed on the property. An alternate storage area could be constructed and comply with City Code. 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 this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the PUD -R zoning district. All properties within the Lake Susan thils West development must maintain a 10 -foot side yard setback. When the subdivision was platted in 1987, the developer had to demonstrate that a 60' by 60' house pad could fit on each lot within the required setbacks. 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: The purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding. The alleged hardship of encroaching into the side yard setback is a self-created hardship. The desire for the proposed shed is based on the purchase of a motorcycle and indoor storage. An accessory building is allowed within the buildable area provided it meets the zoning requirements. The applicant has reasonable use of the property, a single-family house and a two -car garage, as well as another shed in the rear yard of the property. The proposed variance is for convenience, rather than necessity. Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 6 of 6 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 variance may be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. The shed crowds the common property line to the North reducing the required separation between buildings. 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 dirninish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Finding: The proposed vanation may impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, due to the close proximity of the structure to the property line. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Gafftiviiss City Council adopt the following motion: "The Plaming Gaffmiissieft City Council denies Planning Case 07-22, for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 -foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4 Block 1, Lake Susan I -fills West 5d' Addition, based on the findings of fact in the staff report. The Planning conviiis City Council further directs that: 1. 'Me applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod." ATFACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced copy of lot survey. 4. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. 5. Letter of Appeal. gAplan\2007 planning �\07-22 scherle varianceNcc flamingo var mpon-doc CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 2,2007 Chairman McDonald called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mark Undestad, Dan Keefe, Kathleen Thomas and Jerry McDonald MEMBERS ABSENT: Debbie Larson, Kurt Papke and Kevin Dillon STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resource Specialist; Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; and Krista Torgerson, Natural Resources Technician PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS: Jerry & Janet Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive Debbie Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive PUBLIC HEARING: SCHERLE VARIANCE: REOVEST FOR AN AFTER -THE -FACT VARIANCE TO A SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE ADDITION ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT -RESIDENTIAL (PUD -R) LOCATED AT 8541 FLAMINGO DRIVE, APPLICANT: DAVID & JULIE SCHERLE, PLANNING CASE NO. 07-22. Public Present: Name Address David & Julie Scherle 8541 Flamingo Drive Daniel Tan 8551 Flamingo Drive Robert Whims 8556 Flamingo Drive Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. McDonald: Mark, any questions? Undestad: Just one on the driveway. You said there was a hard surface issue and now that's been, with the shed, square footage and everything else is okay on there? Generous: Right. They removed the excess. There used to be an expansion on the driveway that was in there. There's some retaining walls and some other things that the property owner removed in the interim since when they were first notified that that was an issue and the present time. Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Undestad: The square footage of the shed area is, that can stay. That square footage is okay? Generous: I believe that was included in, I don't know. I had it. Yes, the shed was included in that. And it would comply. Undestad: Okay. McDonald: Okay. Thomas: Yeah, okay. Of the things that they removed in the interim, does that also include the shed that's in the back, or is that. Generous: No, that's still. Thomas: That's still there on the property. And then I saw in the paper where it said the city, we maybe could put it on the back side of the garage I believe is what I was reading. Is that really a viable space or? Generous: Not if you look at it, not immediately behind the garage. Thomas: Okay. Generous: Unfortunately the survey doesn't show all the improvements on the property. It's from the original building permit application and so if you look at the picture you can see there's a deck behind there. Thomas: Okay. Generous: But there is room in the rear yard that a structure could be incorporated. Thomas: Could be incorporated in back. Okay. That was my question. Thank you. McDonald: Dan. Keefe: The, this is a PUD. Is the setback in the rear 5 feet like it is in RSF? Just out of curiosity. Is it 5 in the back for accessory structures and then 10 on the sides and that's for RSF right? And that's what was applied in this particular PUD? Generous: Yes. Keefe: Itis. So it's consistent with the. Generous: With the RSF. Keefe: WiththeRSF. Alright, so we don't have a conflict there. Okay. That'saillhave. 2 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 McDonald: I don't have any questions at this time for staff. Is there someone here to present the applicant? Would you step up to the podium and state your name and address and just address the commissioners and tell us your side of all this. Dave Scherle: My name's Dave Scherle, 8541 Flamingo Drive. We think the location of the shed is the best place for it and we're hoping to get the variance to keep it there. Angie, the planner, she was suggesting we put it behind the garage where it would fit there, but to drive our motorcycle back in that location we'd have to go over grass and we can't, it just, the motorcycle weighs over 800 pounds and it, it'd be too much, too dangerous. You'd have to drive over grass or dirt and you could damage the motorcycle or injure the rider, and the shed itself will have the same siding as the house has and the roof will have the same kind of shingles as the house has and the soffits and the eaves will have the same color as the house too so it should fit right in with the house, but it won't be part of the garage. It will be right next to the garage. It won't be actually you know connected. But it's right next to the, to the garage. We'd have to remove the sidewalk that the shed is on right now to meet the requirements of the hard cover so that's why we'd have to be driving on grass to get the motorcycle back there. So that's the main reason why we need it where it's at right now. That's it. McDonald: Okay. Mark. Undestad: Yeah, just one, well actually a couple questions here. The foundation, is it a below grade foundation or is it just the sidewalk and you're building. Dave Scherle: Just the sidewalk. Mod of a floating slab. Undestad: Okay. So it will move in the wintertime when... Dave Scherle: Yeah. There could be some movement with it, yeah. Undestad: And looking at how this sits on there, I realize where you're at in the stages right now when it's out there. Did you look and see, can it be just pushed back along the garage a little more to get it out of that easement area? Dave Scherle: Well, I looked at that and 1, there isn't, you know I was actually thinking about doing that because I was going to try getting some rollers underneath to move it back farther but it would still be in that easement. Otherwise yeah, that is a really good idea. Yeah there is, it still would be in the easement. Undestad: And that sidewalk then that you've got already poured in there, you can maneuver your motorcycle around the front of the garage to get into that? Dave Scherle: It will be a little tight but I think I'll be able to do it. McDonald: Okay. Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Dave Scberle: Might have to put in a, you know I'm a little, I've got probably a little bit of play with the hard cover where I could put in some concrete blocks in that comer to help make it a little bit easier. Undestad: It looked a little tight for that. Dave Scherle: Yeah. Yeah, it is pretty tight so that, I might have to do that but there is some easement, I've got I don't know how many feet but I've got a few square feet. I could just get that in there. Because I would like to make it easy as I could to get in and out. Undestad: How far back, if you could move it back, do you know, did anybody, how far back would it have to go before it's outside of the easement area. Do you know? Dave Scherle: I'm not sure. Undestad: 15, 20 feet. Aanenson: I'd say about 20, yeah. Generous: Probably a little bit farther. Dave Scherle: Because the long property line is not too far from the retaining wall so, but it does, you know it does have a few feet but you know for that kind of feet, you'd have to go back probably by the oh, the deck back there I think probably to get to that far. Undestad: Would it have to be that big for the motorcycle? Dave Scherle: Does what? Undestad: Does it have to be that big? Dave Scherle: No, it doesn't have to be quite that big but you'd still would have to move it so far back. I don't know, let's see the motor -cycle's 103 inches long I think. It's pretty long. But yeah, it wouldn't have to be quite that big. You could make it smaller but if that's what it would take to get it, we could do that too. I mean it's able to take it down and move it. I mean if we have to, we'll take it down and that's all that's to it too. If we don't get the variance so. Undestad: That's all for me. McDonald: Kathleen. Thomas: So I want to know what kind of bike it is. Dave Scherle: It's a Gold Wing. Thomas: Gold Wing? El Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Dave Scherle: Yeah. Thomas: Okay. We have a motorcycle too and 1, so I was just curious. 'Men are you, is it going to be heated? Is it just going to be like a garage? Dave Scherle: Just a garage. Thomas: Just like a garage. Dave Scherle: Yeah. Not heated. Thomas: Not heated. You'll have to go start it and, okay. Alright, I'm good. Keefe: Just to probably state the obvious, were you aware that a permit was required for doing that? Dave Scherle: I didn't think for 120 feet or less you needed a permit for it. That was what I have heard before and I thought that was the case for this. Keefe: Okay, that's it. McDonald: Okay. Where do you currently store your motorcycle? Keefe: It's in the garage with some lumber and stuff right now and the car is outside right now. McDonald: Okay. And how long have you been doing that? Is it just kind of a seasonal thing in the winter you'll put the motorcycle away? Keefe: Well right now, see our old motorcycle that we owned before, we just got this July. I could fit in the garage and it was okay. Plus it was easier. It was a smaller motorcycle. I could drive it on the grass and get it to the back shed to store. But in the surnmer I could, yeah or summer I could get it off the side so I could get the car in and out and then my back was bothering me with that motorcycle so we bought this other motorcycle to you know help out on the back and it really has because there's not much vibration on a Gold Wing. McDonald: Okay. And then on the shed itself, how wide does it really need to be because it looks as though, could you narrow things up? Bring it in closer to the garage? Keefe: See it's really pushing it for even a 4, I've got like a 4 1/2 foot garage door that I can just get in there. That's the best I could and let's see what is it? 3 1/2 feet wide I think from mirror to mirror so there's not a lot, even with that 4 1/2 foot garage door for you know, you have a little bit on each side but you want something on each side of the motorcycle to get in there so you don't hit. I-bt the door. Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 McDonald: Okay. And the retaining wall that's shown in that photograph, is that something that was built as a part of putting the shed up, or was that already existing? Dave Scherle: That was already existing and the only thing that's left of that is the retaining wall the length of the shed. It's been removed in front of it. Well it actually goes a little bit in front of the shed. It goes probably approximately 3 or 4 feet. I can't remember exactly. There's an apron. It comes out to that. Actually it shows on the picture here. That it comes out. The retaining wall comes out to there. So yeah, so the retaining wall starts there and goes all the way to the back of the shed right now. ne rest has been removed because of the hard cover. McDonald: Okay. And okay currently you've got a patio on the back side so that's why you're saying that the shed actually couldn't be moved around to the back then? Dave Scherle: Well, if we did move it around to the back, you'd have a hard time getting the motorcycle to it because I'd have to be going on grass with it and you should really be on hard surface to be moving that motorcycle around. Because it could easily, you could easily dump it. I haven't dumped it yet and I hope I never do. It's a lot of weight to pick up. McDonald: 800 pounds, that's going to be kind of hard. Dave Scherle: Yeah. McDonald: Well I guess I don't have any more questions at this point. Undestad: Just one more. Dave Scherle: Okay, sure. Undestad: The shed, is the primary use, is it for the winter storage of the bike or is it just for all time? Dave Scherle: It will be all the time is what we were planning on using it for. McDonald: Okay. Well we thank you for coming up and addressing us then. Dave Scherle: Thank you. McDonald: Okay. At this time then I would open up the floor for public comment on this issue and if anyone wanted to come up and make comment, please do so. When you get to the podium, if you will state your name and address and address your comments to the commission. Robert Whims: Ili, I'm Robert Whims. I live right across the street from Dave. 8556 Flamingo Drive and I just wanted to say the garage, it looks good so I hope you give it to him. McDonald: Okay, thank you. R Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Daniel Tan: I'm Daniel Tan, 8551 Flamingo Drive. Just a neighbor to the side. You know aesthetically the garage looks good and I think you guys, I think ... I think you guys should let it be there. Thank you. McDonald: Okay, thank you. Does anyone else wish to come up before the commission? Okay well at that point then I guess I will close the public meeting portion of this and I'll bring it back up for the commissioners for open discussion then. Why don't we start down here with Dan. Keefe: Yeah, I've got just sort of two thoughts on it. One is you know, if we allow this to go in on this side and then say the next door neighbor or you know that's adjacent to him, you know decides they want to do that and because it's on this we sort of, maybe are obligated to do that. Then you end up with a pretty small space inbetween the houses. Do we end up with a potential you know issue with fire and being able to get emergency vehicles or so far, you know. I think in part the purpose for the setbacks is to allow you know space for, space between the houses both for maybe emergency vehicles and then also just for aesthetic reasons, so kind of torn on that issue. I don't know if you guys have any thoughts on that. The side setbacks. McDonald: That's kind of what I'm kind of torn between too. Those things are put in there for the reason that you state. It's very, I mean we face this same problem just about everything that comes before us. You know developers come in, sell us on a house. It meets the setbacks and they go right to the limit and then we end up with the homeowner trying to do something and we tell them they can't. But the setbacks are there for a reason and you know we are very consistent with that so yeah, I understand. I'm kind of torn on this myself. Kathleen. Thomas: I'm the same issue. I can totally understand setbacks, if we grant them like this it creates like a slippery slope of who else will want the same type of thing, but I understand what the gentleman is saying about the shed. It being, it's really I'm quite torn just because I see it, both sides so. McDonald: Mark. Undestad: Well you know primarily it's drainage in there too. Everything goes from the back of that lot out to the street to the front of that lot. You know if we start pushing those setbacks and drainage in there, you know you've got a happy now. I'm sure he wants to keep him that way too instead of flooding out his basement in there when the heavy rains come in but again, nobody likes to see something that's already built and have to start moving things around but you know, that's again, that's why we have the setbacks and the easements and basically the no build... McDonald: Yeah, I guess the thing I'm kind of torn between is that you know emotionally you're probably one of the nicer guys to come up before us and ask for this. Most everybody else is very much in our face about why we ought to do this. The setbacks are there for a reason. The drainage is very important. We have a lot of problems within the city as far as drainage. Every time a developer comes in, that's part of the design process that we go through with the developer to say you've got to do this as far as drainage and they put this stuff in. What you're asking us to do is similar to two other applications that came in before us and I know that in one case we asked a guy to take out a gazebo because he was on easement and drainage and it was 7 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 just going to create a big problem. It was a beautiful structure. He had a lot more money into it by the time he got to us than you know what you've got at this point but we have to enforce the rules and they're there for a reason. One thing staff does, we study these things very hard to give homeowners maximum use of their property without interfering with the rights of others. I understand, and again we all feel kind of your pain about this. Yeah, 800 pound motorcycle, you've got to put it someplace. Gold Wing's a beautiful bike and everything but the problem that we run into is that we can't base decisions based upon that. I just don't believe we can do that or anyone can come in here and again give us a good story and reasons why, we've had to turn down people because of physical handicaps and everything and that's the hard part about this job but I guess you know my leaning is, yeah I would feel for you and everything. You've got a good reason I guess for building the shed to begin with. I appreciate your civility about coming up here and the way you've approached this and stuff but I'm probably going to have to lean on the side of where the rules are at. I guess. Undestad: Can I add one thing though? Again I mean you can go to the council on that but these types of structures too when they're built without foundations on there, and again being in the area that it's in with the drainage and that, there's potential for a lot of movement. You know hinging off your house. You can be kind of faced with problems quite a while as that thing constantly goes up and down. You know it will pull away from your house. Go back to your house. Kind of the reasons too why you know a lot of the stuff, sheds like this should be put on something a little more stable foundation wise. McDonald: Any further comments? Then I guess at this time we're ready to accept a recommendation. Who'd like to. Undestad: I'll get it here. Recommend the Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-22 for a 7 foot 3 inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan lElls West 5h Addition based on the Findings of Fact in the staff report. The Planning Commission further directs that number 1, the applicant must move the shed. Comply with zoning ordinance. And the applicant must revegetate all removed hard surface as with grass seed or sod. Keefe: Second. McDonald: Okay. Undestad moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission denies Planning Case #07- 22 for a 7 foot 3 inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition, based on the Findings of Fact in the staff report. The Planning Commission further directs that: I . The applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod. 1.1 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 AD voted in favor, except Thomas who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 1. McDonald: Okay, motion passes 3 to 1. What I would suggest is you talk with the city staff on this. You have a right to appeal this up to the City Council. The minutes of this particular hearing will go into the packet for the City Council. You may be able to reach a compromise with staff that would work within the ordinance and everything and still accommodate what you want. I think you'll find them very accommodating and try to help give you some you know good ideas as to what to do. COMEPREHENSIVE PLAN: PARKS & OPEN SPACE, NATURAL RESOURCES ELEMENTS. Public Present: Name Address Tim Erhart 9611 Meadowlark Lane Glenn Stolar Park and Rec Commission Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mr. Chair, members of the Planning Commission. As you know the last year we spent a lot of time going through the evolution of the comprehensive plan, which I'm happy to announce is out and out for press. It did go out last Friday for jurisdictional review. It is required for 6 month open hearing date, so that time is starting right now. I also wanted to let you know, you do have a hard copy, the entire hard copy in front of you. Just for everybody else, for their knowledge and information, the entire comprehensive plan draft is on the city's web site, so if anybody's interested in reading a particular chapter, I hope you read all the chapters, they can go online and do that. The goal of the public hearing process to get input from our residents to see if we're moving in the right direction and address their concerns. Not only our residents but the jurisdictions that it goes out to, includes the school districts, the watershed districts, DNR, just to name a few. So we're hoping to get positive input, or informative input that we can respond to as we move forward in the process. So as we set up this process we're going to take a couple chapters at a time for you to hold the public hearing and to gather that input and at the end of that process, as we break it down, well move into January where we respond in writing to the comments that are received and the staff that it's more appropriately addressed to will also respond so actually you'll have that collection of responses. So whether it goes to engineering or parks and rec or planning, we'll respond to those comments and you can see what those are. Then ultimately your comments will be forwarded up to the City Council for their review and then after we have the 6 month jurisdiction review, it goes up to the Met Council who gets another 60 days to review. So we're looking probably in sometime the first part of July for final adoption. So I just wanted everybody to know there's plenty of time to get comments into the city. If you want to call and speak to the person that would be most appropriate to talk to, whether it's engineering, city forester, the planning department to talk to and get your questions answered. We hope people take the time to review that. So for tonight the first two chapters that we'll be looking at will be the natural resources which includes forestry, natural resources and water resources and then park and rec. The Environmental V1 0-1 -'Z -�7 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MRTNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND ACTION IN RE: Application of David and Julie Scherle for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance for the addition of a shed — Planning Case No. 07-22. On October 22, 2007, the Chanhassen City Council met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the Appeal of David and Julie Scherle for 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance for the addition of a shed at 8541 Flamingo Drive, located in the Planned Unit Development Residential District (PUD -R) at Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition, which had been denied at the October 2,2007 Planning Commission meeting. The City Council reviewed the October 2, 2007 Planning Corrunission minutes, heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development Residential (PUD -R). 2. ne property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential — Low Density (Net Density Range 1.2 — 4u/Acre). 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition. 4. 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. The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, and a two -car garage are constructed on the property. An alternate storage area could be constructed and comply with City Code. b. The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the PUDR zoning district. All properties within the Lake Susan Hills West development must maintain a 10 foot side yard setback. When the subdivision was platted in 1987, the developer had to demonstrate that a 60 by 60 house pad could fit on each lot with in the required setbacks. c. The purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. d. The alleged hardship of encroaching into the side yard setback is a self-created hardship. The desire for the proposed shed is based on the purchase of a motorcycle and indoor storage. An accessory building is allowed within the buildable area provided it meets the SCANNED zoning requirements. The applicant has reasonable use of the property, a single family house and a two car garage, as well as another shed in the rear yard of the property. The proposed variance is for convenience, rather than necessity. e. The variance maybe detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Since the shed crowds the common property line to the North and reducing the required separation between buildings. f. The proposed variation may impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, due to the close proximity of the structure to the property line. 5. The planning report #07-22 Variance dated October 2, 2007, prepared by Angie Auseth, et al, is incorporated herein. ACTION "Ibe City Council denies Planning Case 07-22, for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 -foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4 Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5h Addition, based on the findings of fact in the staff report. The City Council further directs that: 1. The applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod." ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council on this 22d day of October, 2007. CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL BY - Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor g:\plan\2007 planning cases\07-22 scherle variance\cc findings of fact.dix 2 November 5, 2007 Re: Variance Case # 07-22 Dear Sir/Madam: This is to inform you that we will remove our shed by November 26 according to the ruling by the City Council. Thank you, II)a lu cherle CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED NOV 0 5 2007 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT I 0-� - ;=� =-;L- r City Council Meeting - October 22, 2007 Public Present: Name Address David Bieker 1770 Lucy Ridge Court Angell Galioto 1805 Emerald Lane Paul Oehme: Thank you Mayor, City Council members. Denali Homes has requested that Lots I and 2, Block 2 of Lake Lucy Ridge be combined to accommodate a proposed house, driveway and pool. In order to process the lot combination, a 5 foot wide drainage utility easement along the common property line of Lot I and 2 must be vacated. The subject properties are shown here. This is the plat for Lake Lucy Ridge. And again the properties are just south of Lake Lucy Road, east of Galpin, just for the general information area. The lots are located and the easements in question proposed to be vacated are again, are along the property lines between Lots I and 2. Gopher State One has been called and, to show that there's no existing public or private utilities within the vacated area. Proposed vacated area. Staff recommends that the approval of the vacation at this time and I stand for questions and request that a public hearing be opened. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions for staff9 Seeing none, let's proceed with the public hearing and invite any interested parties to come forward to the podium that wish to comment on this item. Please state your name and address for the record. Seeing nobody, last call. Seeing no one then we'll close the public hearing without objection and bring it back to council for any thoughts or comments. Seems fairly straightforward given the conditions included in the staffs recommendation. Any comments or discussion? Councilman Peterson: Motion to approve. MayorFurlong: Thankyou. Isthereasecond? Councilwoman Ernst: Second. MayorFurlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? Resolution #2007-65: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilwoman Ernst seconded that the City Council approve the vacation of drainage and utility easements for Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Lake Lucy Ridge contingent upon simultaneous recording of the lot combination. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. SCHERLE VARIANCE: APPEAL DECISION OF DENIAL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION REQUEST FOR AN AFrER-THE-FACT VARUNCE TO A SIDE City Council Meeting - October 22, 2007 Public Present: Name Address David & Julie Scherle 8541 Flamingo Drive Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mayor, members of the council. As you indicated this is in Lake Susan Subdivision. Powers Boulevard is just on the side of the map. This is the subject property. 8554. The applicant was noted as putting up a garage without a permit and as noted it was in the side yard setback. The subject lot, it meets the 10 foot minimum right now. With the accessory garage it encroaches into the side yard setback. We passed an ordinance amendment a number of years ago where we had a variance for someone who had to put eaves on and how they got the variance. We don't normally count the eaves except when there is a variance because it even further encroaches. So with the eaves that added up on the variance. The Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on this item on October 2d and they voted on it actually 3 to I to deny the variance. There was a lot of discussion on the use of the property and how it would be best served. This is the garage side, so this is where the applicant who has a new motorcycle wants to be able to put that into this enclosed, covered structure. Some of the material had been removed to improve the impervious requirements and the setback itself. The structure doesn't have footings. It appeared to be some mobility to it. I did note from all the discussion on the Planning Comirtission about the flexibility and maybe it could be moved to meet the requirement. As noted in the staff report the Planning Commission did ask the staff to try to work with the applicant and he chose to just pursue continuation of the request, as he has a right to appeal their findings. So looking at the options that the staff we kind of considered what the Planning Commission from the back side. A storage structure has been removed if there was a possibility of moving that structure to the back side of the building. Again because it's under 120 square feet, it doesn't need a building code permit. Although it is attached to the structure, it doesn't have footings, it seemed like it would be somewhat easy to move from the structure itself. For that reason the staff is recommending denial and again with the 3 to 1 vote, the Planning Commission concurred with that. The Findings of Fact are in the staff report and then the staff is recommending the denial of the variance. So with that if you have any questions I'd be happy to answer them. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff at this time? One of the items mentioned in the initial report I believe it was that there was concern also about impervious surface coverage. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: But that that was satisfied or the changes were made to it? Kate Aanenson: Yeah. The applicant has removed quite a bit of material including some of the patio in the back and some of the driveway on the front of the house has been removed to meet that. Mayor Furlong: Okay, so that has, these pictures were taken before that. I City Council Meeting - October 22, 2007 Kate Aanenson: Correct. Yeah, because I believe that was the modifications to the roof itself as far as the metal roof. That seemed to a concern for the staff too, especially for some of the neighbors that may have aesthetic ... to that. Typically a structure like that may be found more in the rear of the principle structure. Mayor Furlong: If the structure is moved, is there sufficient impervious surface coverage with what's, right now it's sitting on sideway so if it's moved off the sidewalk to another location, do they have sufficient space for impervious surface to be able to do that without removing other, or would they have to remove more hard surface coverage? Kate Aanenson: We do have a chart of what's been removed. I believe they're in compliance now. They moved it back. Some of the patio on the back was, I think what we had recommended, it's hard to look at it this way. This, in order to meet the hard cover to put it on the back, this would have to be narrowed up again and there's still the encroachment into the easement. We did check with Gopher One. There is no utilities in that easement but to meet the impervious this would have to be reduced down to the current pavement just would move to the back side. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other questions for staff? Mrs. Tjomhom. Councilwoman Tjomhom: The last time we had someone here for a variance was a couple weeks ago or, I think Bob was dealing with it. They didn't count the retaining walls. Kate Aanenson: Correct. Councilwoman Tjomhom: And so how come we're doing it this time? Kate Aanenson: They're still, they would be, we're not counting the retaining wall on this one. Councilwoman Tjomhom: But I thought they had to remove some of the retaining wall? Kate Aanenson: He removed some of it to level out, to get the setback. What we've done now is we've researched some of this stuff. We have researched what other communities are doing with retaining walls and what our interpretation, and have we denied anybody from the last 2 years. We went back and looked through all the ordinances. We haven't been using it except for the last 2 years. We haven't denied anybody on that so we're not including it so he's still okay and that would still make it whole by bringing in part of the driveway and moving it to the back. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions for staff at this time? No? Is the applicant here this evening? Any thoughts or comments? Mr. Scherle, good evening. David Scherle: R. My name's David Scherle, 8541 Flamingo Drive. We'd like to thank you for hearing us on this appeal of the variance of the shed. We appreciate the time of taking to hear our appeal. And see about the, I don't know this is the first time I heard about that we didn't have to do the retaining wall. Yeah, that's something new to me because that's what we took down a City Council Meeting - October 22, 2007 big part of the retaining wall to help do the hard cover so that's something new to us. It would have been nice to know that but that's the way it goes. But there's some. Kate Aanenson: Just for the record, it's 27 square feet so I'm not sure. The total affect of that. It's pretty nominal of the overall percentage of what you were over with. David Scherle: Oh, okay. We'd like to address some of the points the Planning Commission made after we were unable to address what they were talking about. They were talking about the hard rains might fall on the next door neighbor but the shed is downhill from the neighbors so it really wouldn't cause any flooding problems. And with all the rain we've had, we wouldn't have had any problems with it at all. And then they were talking about everybody in the neighbor would want a variance you know like this but you have to really address every situation you know separately. Ixt's see. Our previous motorcycle was in our garage and that one we were able to make work, you know fit in the garage and then I had a back problem so we ended up getting this bigger motorcycle and we had to, we couldn't fit it in with the garage with our cars and stuff so that's why we need the shed where it's at. And moving the shed to the back of the garage we were figuring how we'd need 3 feet of sidewalk to go along side of the garage and with that hard cover and the 6 by 9 foot garage, or the shed behind the garage we would be over the hard cover so that's why, we were working with Angie on, at the Planning Commission about the complying with the hard cover and putting the shed back there and between the, oh the sidewalk width and the turn around we'd need back there for the motorcycle, and the 6, the smallest size we could have for the shed would be 6 foot by 9 foot and between all of that it'd be over the hard cover so that's why it wouldn't work behind the garage. And yeah, there's no problem with the septic system or the utilities at all. And with the lake and the adequate light and air for adjacent properties, it's still down a ways from the neighbor's property so we didn't think there was no problem with that. And let's see. I think that's it. So thanks for considering, of hearing us for the appeal of the shed and hopefully we can work things out. Do you have any questions or concerns that I could help answer? Mayor Furlong: Any questions for Mr. Scherle? Was there a reason that you didn't want to work with staff initially to try to find a solution or do you think you've exhausted that at this time? David Scherle: I think we've exhausted, yeah. Because I did call and talk to her and then I tried measuring it out for the hard cover and that's not going to work out. Otherwise yeah, we were trying to work as much as we can with the city as to how we could make this work out. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other questions for Mr. Scherle? Councilman Litsey: Is there anyway to come off the back side of the garage so you could actually have as part of the interior of the garage so you could kind of move the motorcycle up in front of the cars like I do at my house or? I don't have an extra extension on my garage but that's where I put it. David Scherle: That's a possibility if we put a door. I City Council Meeting - October 22, 2007 Councilman Litsey: There you could access it from the interior of the garage. I mean part of your, but I don't know if that's permissible. Kate Aanenson: That was one of our suggestions. There is a door, you can see it over here. There's a door, if you crank that out and just push the fence along the back side so you wouldn't have to have this back sidewalk. Just have it as part of the back yard and go through the garage. Councilman Litsey: To me that'd be almost more convenient. Kate Aanenson: That was one of our suggestions. Councilman Litsey: To set off part of your garage and aesthetically it would-be to the back side of the house. David Scherle: I don't know if that'd be possible. But possibly to put a door on the side of the garage, that's maybe a possibility because otherwise if you put it, you know extend onto the garage, you're still having a problem trying to get it in and out with cars and everything so it is a possibility of putting a garage door on the side. Councilman Litsey: And go out through that door. David Scherle: Yeah, then we could use the sidewalk to drive it on. That would be a possibility. Councilman Litsey: I guess that would be my thought is perhaps you could work with staff on that idea rather than having to go through the, because the setback's 10 feet and you're just trying to force something... Mayor Furlong: Any other questions of Mr. Scherle? Okay, thank you. David Scherle: Thanks. Mayor Furlong: Any follow-up questions for staff or discussion? Thoughts and comments. Councilman Litsey: Just one and Kate, you could go off the back of the garage right? Kate Aanenson: That was our suggestion too. Councilman Litsey: Oh, okay. Kate Aanenson: No, I appreciate your suggesting it. Councilman Litsey: So it wasn't my. Kate Aanenson: No, I think you know somehow it seemed like it would work. There's two issues going on. One was the impervious which Mr. Scherle worked very hard to get in compliance and we appreciate those efforts. He's been very cooperative. Secondly, it's just the we City Council Meeting - October 22, 2007 aesthetic of having some more of these, it doesn't have a footing, it's not architecturally integral to the house and certainly it performs a function of keeping the motorcycle covered, which we understand but I think we wouldn't want to see a lot of them built to this kind of style just because it's, it looks more temporary in nature and maybe that would be best served on the back side is where Councilman Litsey was going. That's kind of what we thought too. And it serves a purpose of providing cover that's not architecturally seen. Seeing the same format. Mayor Furlong: Well with the, there is room on the back of the garage with regard to setbacks, where there isn't room on the side. Kate Aanenson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: Is part of it too which is where your idea was, even though they had the idea first. Councilman Litsey: I'll yield to them. Mayor Furlong: You can run it a lot of different ways. I was coming out the back door. You had a different slant on it so I think you know, somehow working that approach would be best served. Mayor Furlong: Find a way to work it within the existing restrictions I guess is what I hear you saying Councilman Litsey. Councilman Utsey: Yes. Mayor Furlong: Any other thoughts or comments? Other thoughts or comments? Councilwoman Ernst: Sounds like a good solution. Yeah, it sounds like they're complying. I think that's... Mayor Furlong: Well I think Mr. Scherle was continuing to want it on the side of the house is what I heard. David Scherle: And we're going to put the same garage door as the garage door itself, I forgot to mention. It will look like it's part of the garage. Same siding. Same color of overhang and we're going to put the regular shingles that are on the house right now on the garage too so it will really fit well in the neighborhood. Kate Aanenson: The siding does match. Our concern was that originally it just had the metal on the roof and now he's explaining, he's willing to put the shingles on but that was some of our concern. It does not have permanent footings so. Mayor Furlong: There are architectural issues that I'm hearing but the issue before us is really the setback. The location of it. I think versus the design of the construction materials, so that's what. 10 . City Council Meeting - October 22, 2007 Kate Aanenson: Correct. But if you were to approve it, one of the mitigation strategies was it had to be architecturally compatible is what I would recommend if you were to, yep. Mayor Furlong: I see. Kate Aanenson: Just so it looks like it's part of the house and not just an appendix that doesn't match in. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Okay, I see. Kate Aanenson: And I think that was what the neighbors expectations or their concern was, yeah. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Other thoughts or comments? Councilman Utsey: Have there been any comments by neighbors so far? Kate Aanenson: There was some at the Planning Commission that did support it. Councilman Utsey: Oh yeah, that's right. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, but there was some that we received that were a little concerned about. Mayor Furlong: Other thoughts? Councilman Peterson. Councilwoman Tjomhom. Councilman Peterson: Well you know as far as variances go I don't see a compelling reason to grant this one over the other ones which we've historically denied. You know I clearly don't see a defined hardship so I, as it stands and as requested presented, I can't support it but I certainly support being creative with staff to try to do it without a variance. Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Tjomhom, anything? Councilwoman Tjomhom: Yeah, I would concur. I always start these processes out by saying that they're never easy because nothing's ever black and white. I don't think the applicants decided to put a shed in and make sure the setback wasn't correct and I think he was trying to make legal use of the property in his eyes and protect his investment, which I totally understand but unfortunately I have to look at it more ordinance wise and what we do. What the rules are for setbacks. And clearly he's over the limit for setbacks and that has a couple implications. Drainage was one of them. Perhaps not the neighbors but perhaps for himself, in his own yard backingup. And also it's encroaching on other people's property or just at least the, the lots of separation that was going to be occurring between his property and his neighbors. And so because of that too I also have to support staffs position and will not be supporting this request. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. My thoughts are similar. Whenever we look at these, it's part of the process to try to solve the problem. You know and often we try to look for, how can it be I I City Council Meeting - October 22, 2007 solved and that's the nature of a number of our questions, as you probably heard this evening. You know what are the alternatives besides granting the variance. It sounds like there are some. They may not be necessarily preferable to the applicant, to the property owner, but there certainly are some that would fit within the ordinance. To Councilman Peterson's point, you know is there a compelling reason here to grant this? Is there something so unique here that really creates that hardship, and that's really one of the hurdles and I think it's a tough hurdle to get over but what I'm okay with having it be tough because the variances should be the exception. I think this is, from what I'm hearing here the desire here is much more of a convenience versus a hardship. Whether or not certainly desires to do it, I haven't been convinced again that there's a compelling reason for that. So my position would be not to grant the variance but to continue to look for and encourage Mr. and Mrs. Scherle to work with staff and say how can something else be done within the ordinance. Is there a way to locate this so that you can protect your personal property? But at the same time do it in such a way that we fit within the setbacks and we fit within the impervious surface coverage requirements. My sense is there's probably, it may not be initially the desired way but there's probably a way and so I would encourage you to work with them and would ask staff, and I know they will, try to cooperate with you as they do always with property owners to find ways to get it to work within the ordinance and that's what we always like to see so. Other thoughts and comments at this point. If not, is there a motion with regard to the request for the appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of the variance request. Councilwoman Tjornhom: I'll make a motion. Mayor Furlong: Councilwoman Tjornhom. Councilwoman Tjomhom: The City Council denies Planning Case 07-22 for a 7 foot, 3 inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5'h Addition based upon the Findings of Fact in the staff report. Mayor Furlong: You can sit back Roger. Councilwoman Tjornhom: The Council also further directs that the applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance and the applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Is there a second? Councilman Litsey: Second. Mayor Furlong: Any discussion? On that. Councilwoman Tjornhorn moved, Councilman Litsey seconded that the City Council denies Planning Case 07-22 for a 7 foot, 3 inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake 12 . City Council Meeting - October 22, 2007 Susan Hills West 5th Addition, based on the Findings of Fact in the staff report. The City Council further directs that: 1 . The applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. DISCUSSION OF KURVERS POINT SPEED LIMITS. Mayor Furlong: The next item on our agenda was, staff had conducted a speed limit study for Kurvers Point Road and at the request of the residents we scheduled it for tonight's council meeting to discuss it. We received notification, staff received notification earlier today that, at the request of those same residents, that they did not want to proceed with the discussion this evening so unless anybody is here to discuss that, I don't know if anybody is. If you raise your hand if you are. If not I would recommend that I think the staffs report was pretty complete and there's no action required at the council so, unless there is any desire to go forward, we can just bypass item number 5 this evening. Without objection we'll do that. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Todd Gerhardt: Just want you to put down on your calendar November 29th. It's the ribbon cutting for Highway 312 and you'll be seeing a special invitation for that but I just wanted you to keep that date open on your calendar. And Roger's also informed me that the Court ruled in our favor for the Arild Rossavik suit against the City so that was good news. And that's all I have. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any discussion or questions for Mr. Gerhardt or staff?. Has that meeting been moved again? The ribbon cutting. Todd Gerhardt: Oh, did I say the wrong date? Laurie Hokkanen: I haven't received notification on the final date. I didn't know if you had gotten something. Todd Gerhardt: What date did you have? Laurie Hokkanen: I don't know. Todd Gerhardt: Okay. Mayor Furlong: I had heard the Monday. The first Monday in December. I had heard that as recently as 2 weeks ago but that could have changed. Laurie Hokkanen: I'll check tomorrow and email everyone 13 gAplan\2007 planning cases\07-22 scherle varianceNdenial letterAm WANNED The City of Chanhassen - A growing community with clean lakes, rprfli� schools, a chaunning downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A peat place to live, work, and play. October 26, 2007 CITY OF David and Julie Scherle CIMHASE 8541 Flamingo Drive Chanhassen, Mn 55317 7700 Market Boulevard `0 Box 147 Chanhaw, MN 55317 Re: 8541 Flamingo Drive — Planning Case #07-22 Administration Dear Mr. and Mrs. Scherle: Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 This letter is to confirm that on October 22, 2007, the Chanhassen City Council Building Inspection approved, the following motion; Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax 952.227.1190 "Deny Planning Case #07-22 for a 7 -foot, 3 -inch side yard setback variance from Engineering the required 10 -foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4, Phurne: 952.227.1160 Block 1, Lake Susan I-lills West 5uh Addition, based on the Findings of Fact in the Fax 952.227.1170 staff report. The City Council further directs that: Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 1. The applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. Fu.952.227.1110 2. '17he applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass Park & Recreation seed or sod." Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 You must provide staff with plans to relocate the shed to meet the zoning Recreation Center requirements and submit a zoning permit application, or remove the shed. 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 The site shall be brought into compliance within 30 days of receipt of this letter. An inspection will be conducted on Monday, November 26, 2007 to verify the Planning & Natural Resources proposed plans. Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax:952.227.1110 Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (952) 227-1132 Public Works or aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mri.us. 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Sincerely, Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227,1125 Fax:952.227.1110 Angie Auseth Web Site Planner I www.6chandrasserroln.us ec: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director gAplan\2007 planning cases\07-22 scherle varianceNdenial letterAm WANNED The City of Chanhassen - A growing community with clean lakes, rprfli� schools, a chaunning downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A peat place to live, work, and play. P104"Em LAND SUI engineering LAND PLANN 2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, MN 55120 612) 681 -1914 -Fox 681-9488 625 Highway 10 Northeast Blaine, MN 55434 612) 783 -1880 -Fax 783-1883 Certificate of Survey for: Joseph M. Miller Construction Co. House Address:-- hanhossen, MN Model Name: Frincton 3 ly '.07 1 cs� Co V�+-� m's4c.11 bA4"-- O-W� 'eyCkX-j'$+a-� 'P 93 Cb WIP r0r'V 4 0Y � ')�rb / 91 at, G '937,36 k -,?/ 1\ \ \-%2� ')38 'P �o 0 0 ro '937,36 k -,?/ 1\ \ \-%2� 'P 0 900.0 Denotes Existing Elevation Denotes Proposed Elevation Denotes Drainage & Utility Easement Denotes Drainage Flow Direction --o-- Denotes Monument S Denotes Offset Hub Bearings shown are 9 glo 5e5 kP 3r A 9f�%� Is ..a I 1� 88 N IN oblk —\ CD N 14, -9�?6 le'� PROPOSED HOUSE ELEVATION 4W Level Elevation: 932.25 -9- 3rd Level Elevation: 37.1� Top of Block Elevation: §40.36 Garage Slab Elevation: 940.03 assumed LOT 4 BLOCK 1 LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA 5TH ADDITION I hereby certify that thIs survey, plan or re6ort was prepared by W'r,�,,,,der my dmem-rupwv1ston and-t1m I am auly RqB-fMd Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota, Dated thIs 7 O'PN day of k A.D. 19 ')Z . Ingh . REG. NO. N% e� . k4 A -V lk I. CITY OF CHANHASSEN P.O. Box 147 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, IVIN 55317 — (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION ruuAom Phone 7 -La, -31o�; -_q&,j pFax: Email: rl Co M Planning Case No.0 -7 Owner Name and Address: CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED AUG 3 0 2007 CK4jNHP1SSelPWl7�*VFT Contact: Phone: Fax:— Email: NOTE: Consultation with City staff is required prior to submittal, including review of development plans Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Interim Use Permit (IUP) Non -conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development* Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review (SPR)' Subdivision* Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC) _X_ Variance (VAR) Welland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign - $200 (City to install and remove) x Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" - $50 CUP/SPR(VACNARIWAP/Metes & Bounds - $450 Minor SUB TOTAL FEE $-7-50 - PC( Cf --4 (,_-�03 An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notifiration area will be Invoiced to the applicant prior to the public hearing. *Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2" X 111" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital copy in TIFF -Group 4 (*.tif) format. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: I -o -k q L�' We- 6 C, S 12 n t1i //`5 tOl- S& Ad, C-0"nly' �ifj TOTAILACREAGE: WETLANDS PRESENT: YES 'x NO PRESENTZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST:— 1� /.A 4 6;d& :S'±bq'C-k -�pj- sAed 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 spec'.111c; ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicantwithin 15 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 Owners 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 3027 of A Date 0-V7 0, O;z Date GApLANV�slDevelopment Review Applimtion.DOC Rev. 12105 Written Statements that answer all six of the findings for granting a variance. A) That the literal enforcement of this Chapter would cause undue hardship. "Undue bardshio" means the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. With the purchase of our new motorcycle, we found we were not able to fit this in our -ara-e alon- with our 2 cars. Puttin- a shed on the side of our garage would be the � 0 0 0 most logical place to house our motorcycle, making it easily accessible. Due to the 0 pie shape of our property however, wewould only be able to build this shed 4 1/- feet away from the property line, thus, making it impossible to meet the std. ft. allowance. B) That the condition upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. This is a unique situation due to the shape of our property. C) That the purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of our property. See 'D' below for further explanation. D) That the alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Due to a back issue caused by the vibration of our previous smaller motorcycle; David has recently found it necessary to purchase a bigger motorcycle with minimal to no vibration. As a result, we are unable to fit this in our garage. We have concluded that our best option would be to add a shed next to our garage. E) That 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 of land is located. This shed would not be detrimental to public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neigghborhood. F) That the purposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, etc... The height of this shed is under the soffit of our garage and therefore will not impair light or air to adjacent property. We have discussed this shed with the Abels adjacent to our property and they have no objections. 2422 Enter pr I se Drive Ul Mendoto Heightt. MN 55120 PION, MER LAND WRVEYWIS RM _�M� (612) 681 -1914 -Fox 681 1 —9488 6nijineering PLANNUM - Alt�= 625 Highway 10 1 Nor I thedst Blaine. MN 55434 - 1612) 783 -1880 -Fax 783-1883 Certificate of Survey for:* Joseph M. Miller Construction Co. House Address: hanhossen, MN model Narnel"Clon rype r G-mia� 9 A/ 4/5,1110 G Z' 4 tp 3r > In.h. REG. �j as % YS P.OVED, r V 111Z BY, DEPT, DAM Illyt Dw. DAM -2 WA3- V gno Denotes Existing Elavatl6n Denotes Proposed Elevation PROPOSED HOUSE ELEVATON 4W Level Elevation; Denotes Drainage & Utility Easement 3rd Level Elevation: -937.15 Denotes Drainage: Flow Direction Top of Block Elevqtlon:940.36 --a— Denotes Monument Garage Slab Elevatfore-040,03. 9 Denotes Offset Hub Bearings shown are assumed LOT 4 , BLOCK I LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST CARVM COUNW. MINNESOTA 5TH ADDITION I hesin, a6fillY th8t this litty0Y, Pit" � leliort Wss pn,bered by sne ot a `RV .— —'- ...... . AqMM Land Survivor U�de,ihol..Ith'Stot0ofMi-�..t..D.tedthi, 7-04%cleyoll Art, A.D. 19 !!PZ In.h. REG. �j CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) 1, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on September 20, 2007, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Annesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for the Scherle Variance — Planning Case 2007-22 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, Mnnesota, and by other appropriate records. Karen J. Engetaylt, Depug Clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this,Wk day of 2007. KIM I MEUWISSEN Notary Public -Minnesota Notary Public MyC�kqsimE)qAmJw31,2D10 Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, October 2, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of the agenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for after -the -fact Variance to a side yard setback to Proposal: construct a garage addition on property zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R) Applicant: David & Julie Scherle Property 8541 Flamingo Drive Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing -through the following steps: at the Meeting: 1 , Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/sery/plan/07-22.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Questions & Auseth by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1132. 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. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviem, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Razonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission, City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any Interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation, The Item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process, The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the Item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or party the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings. land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/inclustrial. • Minnesota State Statute 5ig.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard, Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spolkespersontrepresentative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff Is also available to review the project with any Interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing. the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included In the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Plannino Staff person named on the notification, Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, October 2, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later In the evening, depending on the order of the agenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. I Request for after -the -fact Variance to a side yard setback to— Proposal: construct a garage addition on property zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R) Applicant: David & Julie Scherle Property 8541 Flamingo Drive Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing through the following steps: at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/r)lan/`07-22.htmi. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Questions & Auseth by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1132. 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. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Welland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within Soo feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation, These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commencial/industrial. • Minnesota Stale Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spolkespersonlrepresentative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city, Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested pemon(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes am taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be Included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have I something to be included In the report, please contact the Plannino Staff person named on the notification. _J M uisciannner This map �s buffer a legally recorded onst, nor� a scinory and is net intended to be used as me. THe map is a cornplatm Of records. information and dI. toddled in vanctis city, county, state and tederail Officier and other soums,, mclafou, be area h., and 11 to be used for reference Nr,hsas only The City does, not yrarram that the Geographic Infortration System DIS) Data uluel 10 prenare this Made are emor fres. and the City does, boa mendemot that the CIS Data can de used for navigational, thecinng or my other Ni -pet, mcpAring exacbrig measurement of distance or direction or Predsion in the de,wwon of godtaphic feature. R emom or discrepancies am found pleace, contact 5152=-1107 Th. macedrig 6.1.1mer is Provided pursuant to Monesom Slatures §466.03, Sulbd. 21 (2000). and the deer of this map wumWedgaS Met the City shelf not be liable for any damages. and intonessly waives all damns, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all clwm� brought by User, its erpleyeres, or afryins. or third mrfift Mich an.. out of the user's access or use of data montuled. la� 0 (L ThiS Mesa is baybeer a IgWy recorded map nor a sumay and is M intended to be used as, me The mailers a whiPlisten of records, Itimmostion ancl diatalocatedi in various city, county. state andiedleral offices and other addm,, regarding the ares, shohyn. and is to be used for refe,cb,, pd,,daa my. The CWY does her ynimant that Ifie GeNramic Information System (GIS) Data useel to prebom this map am ford, free, and the City does not re,hasent that the GIS Data den be used be nayigatimal thadidng or any dayer pur,,i, requiring exacting measurentent of distends or direction or precision in Me "Men of fpaoffrap1hic, feature. K eurces or iftecre,bil see found plenae, contsult 9!K!-227-1107 1-Im predating declaimer is pm,,ded pument 10 Mnue,d,a Slause §466 03. Subd. 21 (2000). and Me user of this onto ,fm,Wdd,,s, Mat Me City id,all net be Hotta for any damages, and eVolosish, 'yaty'as all crime. -it 1. to deterid, inderrintly, abol hold harmless the City fierh any and off do= brought by User, ibi employees or agents. or third PartmS yhich anse out of the users aciess, or use 0 data pmdedl JOHN C & MAUREEN W JENSEN SCOTT A & STEPHANIE W FISHER CAROLYN SUERTH HUDSON a48O PELICAN CT 1451 HERON DR 11481 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -a529 CHANHASSEN, MINI 55317 -8507 RONALD J & SUE E BUSCH DAVID M & AMY R BURKHOLDER WE] LEONG DANIEL TAN & 8521 FLAMINGO DR AUDREY P BURKHOLDER STEPHANIE H C LEE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 1450 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 11551 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -11506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 JEFFREY T & AMY 8 SMITH GREGORY 0 & ANNE M HUNSAKER CHAD D & SARAH R NICKLESS 8590 FLAMINGO DR 1 "0 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1420 MALLARD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8548 WILEY J & DENISE R WILKINSON KEVIN DOWNEY & BARBARA J LARSON 8481 IBIS CT COURTNEY GREER-DOWNEY 8470 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -a521 1400 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -M7 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 THOMAS A & CHERYL K NIEBELING JON P & RAYETTE A RYDQUIST CHRISTINA M DETERMAN 8491 IBIS CT 1410 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1441 HERON DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -13521 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8529 KENNETH J & KARI D OXONEK ROSS A & NATALIA J HUSEBY JEFFREY J & MERRILEE A ZAHN 1421 HERON DR 1431 HERON DR 8461 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -a528 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8528 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 BETH FRIENDSHUH & ADAM J FEUERHELM & SEAN P HEUSINKVEUD JAMIE S FEUERHELM JAMES A & TAMMY R THOMPSON 8471 PELICAN CT 8550 MERGANSER CT 8511 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8546 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -B523 TIMOTHY T & MOLLY C AMBROSE KEVIN W & ROBYN M WINNEROSKI TIMOTHY C & ANN 8 MCGEE 1421 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1460 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1411 MALLARD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 56317 -8539 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8548 GREGORY C & KIMBERLY A HAYES JON R & HOPE A SMITH ROBERT L & SOPHIA P WHIMS a542 FLAMINGO OR 1421 MALLARD CT 8556 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -11540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8548 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -&940 DOUGLAS DEAN JACOBSON & RAMONA JEAN JACOBSON JUDITH ROSE ANDERSON LISA M JERECZEK 8551 MERGANSER CT a584 FLAMINGO DR 8571 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -a546 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 4540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 JEROME R & MARY GEN REUTZEL KURT P & GAIL M VINJE MARTIN J & TANYA MEIERS 1481 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8596 FLAMINGO DR 8570 TERN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8541 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8547 DANA P & KRISTINE L KALUMAN ROBERT T & DENISE G HEISE STEVEN H & DENISE L MYSTER 1501 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8591 FLAMINGO DR 8571 TERN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8538 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -11523 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8547 JOHN & SUSAN SCHULTZ STEVEN J & DEBORAH A SALERNO JEFFREY P OLDENKAMP & 1430 MALLARD CT 8440 EGRET CT PAMELA C OLDENKAMP CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8548 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8508 1341 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8504 RACHEL L ROBINSON MICHAEL A & GINA M HAMARI STUART C & TANYA M BROWN 1351 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1390 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1420 HERON DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8504 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8503 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8525 KEVIN 8 & SHERYL L IHLANG KURT HEINRICH KAUDY JAMES & GAIL KRONMILLER 1361 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8450 PELICAN CT 8460 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8504 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -M7 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 TERRY W & BARBARA A BOLEN ANISH H & NAMRATA A SHAH GARY P & ANGELA J MAGNUSON 8451 PELICAN CT 1420 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1411 HERON DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -&507 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 4W6 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8528 JOEL A & LISA A HILGENDORF MARK A & JANE M ABEL PATRICK J & BETH M VICTORIAN 1430 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8631 FLAMINGO DR 853D MERGANSER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -11506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -11523 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -Bf546 DENNIS W & DEBRA C WALLACH STEVEN T SCHARFENBERG & ROGER H SMALLBECK 8528 FLAMINGO DR BARBARA M SCHARFENBERG 1431 MALLARD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 1470 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -&'AB CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -85W KEITH A PICHELMAN ROBERT J & RENAE A HOERNEMANN KAREN M RODRIGUEZ 11531 MERGANSER CT 1480 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8561 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -B546 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 ELLING C & MONICA H OLSON BRANDON & STACEY JENC DEAN M & ALLISON C NELSON a570 FLAMINGO DR 11530 TERN CT 8550 TERN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -&'AO CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8547 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8547 ERIK BODEN PEDERSEN & ROSEMARIE DENISE PEDERSEN STEVEN D & LORI C MILEWSKI TODD T & KRISTI LYNN WODEK a581 FLAMINGO DR 8602 FLAMINGO DR 11551 TERN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -11523 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -11558 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8547 MICHAEL STEPHEN SCHMID & JILL RAEANN SCHMID 8599 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 WARNE H LEE & BONNIE E PASCUAL LEE B600 KINGFISHER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8545 DAVID W & JULIE A SCHERLE 8541 FLAMINGO OR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 MOHAMMAD 0 IMAM & 13UBINARAFAT 8607 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8559 JUDY T NEWMAN 8615 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8559 TIMOTHY M & LOIS M VOLD 8620 KINGFISHER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8545 ROBERT E & CHRISTI M NORDBY 8640 KINGFISHER CT CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -a545 PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION AREA (500 FEET) 8541 FLAMINGO DRIVE SCHERLE VARIANCE REQUEST PLANNING CASE 2007-22 CM OF CWHON Date: September 6,2007 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, AIN 55317 (952) 227-1100 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department By: Angie Auseth, Planner I ec %,e ) '�- SJ �r f'r') Subject: SCHERLE VARL4NCE: Request for an after -the -fact variance to a side yard setback to construct a garage addition on property zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R) located at 8541 Flamingo Drive. Applicant: David & Julie Scherle. Planning Case: 07-22 The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on August 30,2007. The 60 -day review period ends October 30,2007. In order for us 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, stonn water drainage, and the need for acquinng 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 Conunission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on October 2, 2007 at 7:00 p.rn. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than September 28, 2007. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated, 1. City Departments: a. City Engineer b. City Attorney c. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official f. Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 3. MN Dept. of Transportation 4. MN Dept. of Natural Resources 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 6. U.S. Fish & Wildlife 7. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services 8. Watershed District Engineer a. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek b. Lower Minnesota River c. Minnehaha Creek 9. Telephone Company (Qwest or Sprint/United) 10. Electric Company (Xcel Energy or MN Valley) 11. Mediacom. 12. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco LOCATION MAP 8541 FLAMINGO DRIVE SCHERLE VARIANCE REQUEST PLANNING CASE 2007-22 2. The overall hard surfitce coverage a) Table of the current hard surface breakdown: House 1675.6 Garage 576 Apron 170.9 Driveway 696.7 Porch 143.8 Front walkway 43.7 Sidewalk 131.9 Shed 120 Retaining wall 27.75 Total 3586.35 sq. ft. L11 b) Breakdown of what we have removed for the hard surface coverage: i. Side driveway ii. Sidewalk behind new shed iii. Shed behind garage iv. Part of retaining wall by driveway and back of garage V. Retaining wall around flower garden 3. Shed size is 6'3" x 20'5" Variance setback is 4' The roof eves are currently 14", will be changed to 12" S I IS . A -e rA L-6+ 74Telz 0-7-X' CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO. 07-22 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, October 2, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider a request for after -the -fact variances on property zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R) located at 8541 Flamingo Drive. Applicant: David & Julie Scherle. A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review on the City's web site at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/st.�/ lan/07-22.htmi or at City Hall during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. Angie Auseth, Planner I Email: aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Phone: 952-227-1132 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on September 20, 2007) SCANNED CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER & HENNEPIN COUNTIES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING CASE NO. 07-22 NOTICEISHEREBYGIVENthat the Chanhassen Planning Commissionwillholdapublichearing on Tuesday, October 2, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers 'in Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hewing is to consider a request for after -the - fact variances on property zoned Planned Unit Development - Residential (PUD -R) located at 11541 Flamingo Drive. Applicant: David & Julie Scherle. A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review on the City's web site at www.ci.chanhassen.mn.-'1' olan/07-22.1i oratCitylialUgg regularbminesshours.Allinterested persons are invited to attend this public hewing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. Angie Auseth, Planner I Email: asmsettiCaci.chanhassen.nmus Phone; 952-227- 1132 (PubhshedintheChanhassenVillager on Thursday, September 20.2007; No. 4949) Affidavit of Publication Southwest Newspapers State of Minnesota) )SS. County of Carver ) Laurie A. Hartmann, being duly sworn, on oath says that she is the publisher or the authorized agent of the publisher of the newspapers known as the Chaska Herald and the Chanhassen Vil- lager and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows: (A) These newspapers have complied with the requirements constituting qualification as a legal newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. (B) "Me printed public notice that is attached to this Affidavit and identified as No. was published on the date or dates and in the newspaper stated in the attached Notice =and said Notice is hereby incorporated as part of this Affidavit. Said notice was cut from the columns of the newspaper specified. Printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, and is hereby acknowledged as being the kind and size of type used in the composition and publication of the Notice: abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz Subscribed and sworn before me on M, OW11 , RLIDIVEM11 P, NOT0 'U� 0 - WNNWA W.yCommmwEpires Jan 31,200 I I I 9�1 1 9 RATE INFORMATION Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space .... $40.00 per column inch Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ............................... S40.00 per column inch Rate actually charged for the above matter .............................................. SI 1.89 per column inch SCANNED 6-7 - 2 V CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMUSSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 2,2007 Chairman McDonald called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mark Undestad, Dan Keefe, Kathleen Thomas and Jerry McDonald MEMBERS ABSENT: Debbie Larson, Kurt Papke and Kevin Dillon STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Jill Sinclair, Environmental Resource Specialist; Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; and Krista Torgerson, Natural Resources Technician PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS: Jerry & Janet Paulsen 7305 Laredo Drive Debbie Lloyd 7302 Laredo Drive PUBLIC HEARING: SCHERLE VARIANCE: REOUEST FOR AN AFFER-THE-FACT VARIANCE TO A 8541 FLAMINGO DRIVE, APPLICANT: DAVID & JULIE SCHERLE, PLANNING CASE NO. 07-22. Public Present: Name Address David & Julie Scherle 8541 Flamingo Drive Daniel Tan 8551 Flamingo Drive Robert Whims 8556 Flamingo Drive Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. McDonald: Mark, any questions? Undestad: Just one on the driveway. You said there was a hard surface issue and now that's been, with the shed, square footage and everything else is okay on there? Generous: Right. They removed the excess. There used to be an expansion on the driveway that was in there. There's some retaining walls and some other things that the property owner removed in the interim since when they were first notified that that was an issue and the present time. Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Undestad: The square footage of the shed area is, that can stay. That square footage is okay? Generous: I believe that was included in, I don't know. I had it. Yes, the shed was included in that. And it would comply. Undestad: Okay. McDonald: Okay. Thomas: Yeah, okay. Of the things that they removed in the interim, does that also include the shed that's in the back, or is that. Generous: No, that's still. Thomas: That's still there on the property. And then I saw in the paper where it said the city, we maybe could put it on the back side of the garage I believe is what I was reading. Is that really a viable space or? Generous: Not if you look at it, not immediately behind the garage. Thomas: Okay. Generous: Unfortunately the survey doesn't show all the improvements on the property. It's from the original building permit application and so if you look at the picture you can see there's a deck behind there. Thomas: Okay. Generous: But there is room in the rear yard that a structure could be incorporated. Thomas: Could be incorporated in back. Okay. That was my question. Thank you. McDonald: Dan. Keefe: The, this is a PUD. Is the setback in the rear 5 feet like it is in RSF? Just out of curiosity. Is it 5 in the back for accessory structures and then 10 on the sides and that's for RSF right? And that's what was applied in this particular PUD? Generous: Yes. Keefe: Itis. So it's consistent with the. Generous: With the RSF. Keefe: With the RSF. Alright, so we don't have a conflict there. Okay. That's all I have. 2 01V�A�e Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 McDonald: I don't have any questions at this time for staff. Is there someone here to present the applicant? Would you step up to the podium and state your name and address and just address the commissioners and tell us your side of all this. Dave Scherle: My name's Dave Scherle, 8541 Flamingo Drive. We think the location of the shed is the best place for it and we're hoping to get the variance to keep it there. Angie, the planner, she was suggesting we put it behind the garage where it would fit there, but to drive our motorcycle back in that location we'd have to go over grass and we can't, it just, the motorcycle weighs over 800 pounds and it, it'd be too much, too dangerous. You'd have to drive over grass or dirt and you could damage the motorcycle or injure the rider, and the shed itself will have the same siding as the house has and the roof will have the same kind of shingles as the house has and the soffits and the eaves will have the same color as the house too so it should fit right in with the house, but it won't be part of the garage. It will be right next to the garage. It won't be actually you know connected. But it's right next to the, to the garage. We'd have to remove the sidewalk that the shed is on right now to meet the requirements of the hard cover so that's why we'd have to be driving on grass to get the motorcycle back there. So that's the main reason why we need it where it's at right now. 'Mat's it. McDonald: Okay. Mark. Undestad: Yeah, just one, well actuafly a couple questions here. The foundation, is it a below grade foundation or is it just the sidewalk and you're building. Dave Scherle: Just the sidewalk. Kind of a floating slab. Undestad: Okay. So it will move in the wintertime when... Dave Scherle: Yeah. There could be some movement with it, yeah. Undestad: And looking at how this sits on there, I realize where you're at in the stages fight now when it's out there. Did you look and see, can it be just pushed back along the garage a little more to get it out of that easement area? Dave Scherle: Well, I looked at that and 1, there isn't, you know I was actually thinking about doing that because I was going to try getting some rollers underneath to move it back farther but it would still be in that easement. Otherwise yeah, that is a really good idea. Yeah there is, it still would be in the easement. Undestad: And that sidewalk then that you've got already poured in there, you can maneuver your motorcycle around the front of the garage to get into that? Dave Scherle: It will be a little tight but I think I'll be able to do it. McDonald: Okay. 3 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Dave Scherle: Might have to put in a, you know I'm a little, I've got probably a little bit of play with the hard cover where I could put in some concrete blocks in that comer to help make it a little bit easier. Undestad: It looked a little tight for that. Dave Scherle: Yeah. Yeah, it is pretty tight so that, I might have to do that but there is some easement, I've got I don't know how many feet but I've got a few square feet. I could just get that in there. Because I would like to make it easy as I could to get in and out. Undestad: How far back, if you could move it back, do you know, did anybody, how far back would it have to go before it's outside of the easement area. Do you know? Dave Scherle: I'm not sure. Undestad: 15, 20 feet. Aanenson: I'd say about 20, yeah. Generous: Probably a little bit farther. Dave Scherle: Because the long property line is not too far from the retaining wall so, but it does, you know it does have a few feet but you know for that kind of feet, you'd have to go back probably by the oh, the deck back there I think probably to get to that far. Undestad: Would it have to be that big for the motorcycle? Dave Scherle: Does what? Undestad: Does it have to be that big? Dave Scherle: No, it doesn't have to be quite that big but you'd still would have to move it so far back. I don't know, let's see the motorcycle's 103 inches long I think. It's pretty long. But yeah, it wouldn't have to be quite that big. You could make it smaller but if that's what it would take to get it, we could do that too. I mean it's able to take it down and move it. I mean if we have to, we'll take it down and that's all that's to it too. If we don't get the variance so. Undestad: That's all for me. McDonald: Kathleen. Thomas: So I want to know what kind of bike it is. Dave Scherle: It's a Gold Wing. Thomas: Gold Wing? 4 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Dave Scherle: Yeah. Thomas: Okay. We have a motorcycle too and 1, so I was just curious. Then are you, is it going to be heated? Is it just going to be like a garage? Dave Scherle: Just a garage. Thomas: Just like a garage. Dave Scherle: Yeah. Not heated. Thomas: Not heated. You'll have to go start it and, okay. Alright, I'm good. Keefe: Just to probably state the obvious, were you aware that a permit was required for doing that? Dave Scherle: I didn't think for 120 feet or less you needed a permit for it. That was what I have heard before and I thought that was the case for this. Keefe: Okay, that's it. McDonald: Okay. Where do you currently store your motorcycle? Keefe: It's in the garage with some lumber and stuff right now and the car is outside right now. McDonald: Okay. And how long have you been doing that? Is it just kind of a seasonal thing in the winter you'll put the motorcycle away? Keefe: Well right now, see our old motorcycle that we owned before, we just got this July. I could fit in the garage and it was okay. Plus it was easier. It was a smaller motorcycle. I could drive it on the grass and get it to the back shed to store. But in the summer I could, yeah or summer I could get it off the side so I could get the car in and out and then my back was bothering me with that motorcycle so we bought this other motorcycle to you know help out on the back and it really has because there's not much vibration on a Gold Wing. McDonald: Okay. And then on the shed itself, how wide does it really need to be because it looks as though, could you narrow things up? Bring it in closer to the garage? Keefe: See it's really pushing it for even a 4, I've got like a 4 1/2 foot garage door that I can just get in there. That's the best I could and let's see what is it? 3 1/2 feet wide I think from miffor to miffor so there's not a lot, even with that 4 112 foot garage door for you know, you have a little bit on each side but you want something on each side of the motorcycle to get in there so you don't hit. I -fit the door. Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 McDonald: Okay. And the retaining wall that's shown in that photograph, is that something that was built as a part of putting the shed up, or was that already existing? Dave Scherle: That was already existing and the only thing that's left of that is the retaining wall the length of the shed. It's been removed in front of it. Well it actually goes a little bit in front of the shed. It goes probably approximately 3 or 4 feet. I can't remember exactly. There's an apron. It comes out to that. Actually it shows on the picture here. That it comes out. The retaining wall comes out to there. So yeah, so the retaining wall starts there and goes all the way to the back of the shed right now. The rest has been removed because of the hard cover. McDonald: Okay. And okay currently you've got a patio on the back side so that's why you're saying that the shed actually couldn't be moved around to the back then? Dave Scherle: Well, if we did move it around to the back, you'd have a hard time getting the motorcycle to it because I'd have to be going on grass with it and you should really be on hard surface to be moving that motorcycle around. Because it could easily, you could easily dump it. I haven't dumped it yet and I hope I never do. It's a lot of weight to pick up. McDonald: 800 pounds, that's going to be kind of hard. Dave Scherle: Yeah. McDonald: Well I guess I don't have any more questions at this point. Undestad: Just one more. Dave Scherle: Okay, sure. Undestad: The shed, is the primary use, is it for the winter storage of the bike or is it just for all time? Dave Scherle: It will be all the time is what we were planning on using it for. McDonald: Okay. Well we thank you for coming up and addressing us then. Dave Scherle: Thank you. McDonald: Okay. At this time then I would open up the floor for public comment on this issue and if anyone wanted to come up and make comment, please do so. When you get to the podium, if you will state your name and address and address your comments to the commission. Robert Whims: I -Ii, I'm Robert Whims. I live right across the street from Dave. 8556 Flamingo Drive and I just wanted to say the garage, it looks good so I hope you give it to him. McDonald: Okay, thank you. 2 Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 Daniel Tan: I'm Daniel Tan, 8551 Flamingo Drive. Just a neighbor to the side. You know aesthetically the garage looks good and I think you guys, I think ... I think you guys should let it be there. Thank you. McDonald: Okay, thank you. Does anyone else wish to come up before the commission? Okay well at that point then I guess I will close the public meeting portion of this and I'll bring it back up for the commissioners for open discussion then. Why don't we start down here with Dan. Keefe: Yeah, I've got just sort of two thoughts on it. One is you know, if we allow this to go in on this side and then say the next door neighbor or you know that's adjacent to him, you know decides they want to do that and because it's on this we sort of, maybe are obligated to do that. Then you end up with a pretty small space inbetween the houses. Do we end up with a potential you know issue with fire and being able to get emergency vehicles or so far, you know. I think in part the purpose for the setbacks is to allow you know space for, space between the houses both for maybe emergency vehicles and then also just for aesthetic reasons, so kinil of torn on that issue. I don't know if you guys have any thoughts on that. The side setbacks. McDonald: That's kind of what I'm kind of torn between too. Those things are put in there for the reason that you state. It's very, I mean we face this same problem just about everything that comes before us. You know developers come in, sell us on a house. It meets the setbacks and they go right to the limit and then we end up with the homeowner trying to do something and we tell them they can't. But the setbacks are there for a reason and you know we are very consistent with that so yeah, I understand. rm kind of torn on this myself. Kathleen. Thomas: I'm the same issue. I can totally understand setbacks, if we grant them like this it creates like a slippery slope of who else will want the same type of thing, but I understand what the gentleman is saying about the shed. It being, it's really I'm quite torn just because I see it, both sides so. McDonald: Mark. Undestad: Well you know primarily it's drainage in there too. Everything goes from the back of that lot out to the street to the front of that lot. You know if we start pushing those setbacks and drainage in there, you know you've got a happy now. I'm sure he wants to keep him that way too instead of flooding out his basement in there when the heavy rains come in but again, nobody likes to see something that's already built and have to start moving things around but you know, that's again, that's why we have the setbacks and the easements and basically the no build... McDonald: Yeah, I guess the thing I'm kind of torn between is that you know emotionally you're probably one of the nicer guys to come up before us and ask for this. Most everybody else is very much in our face about why we ought to do this. The setbacks are there for a reason. The drainage is very important. We have a lot of problems within the city as far as drainage. Every time a developer comes in, that's part of the design process that we go through with the developer to say you've got to do this as far as drainage and they put this stuff in. What you're asking us to do is similar to two other applications that came in before us and I know that in one case we asked a guy to take out a gazebo because he was on easement and drainage and it was Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 just going to create a big problem. It was a beautiful structure. He had a lot more money into it by the time he got to us than you know what you've got at this point but we have to enforce the rules and they're there for a reason. One thing staff does, we study these things very hard to give homeowners maximum use of their property without interfering with the rights of others. I understand, and again we all feel kind of your pain about this. Yeah, 800 pound motorcycle, you've got to put it someplace. Gold Wing's a beautiful bike and everything but the problem that we run into is that we can't base decisions based upon that. I just don't believe we can do that or anyone can come in here and again give us a good story and reasons why, we've had to turn down people because of physical handicaps and everything and that's the hard part about this job but I guess you know my leaning is, yeah I would feel for you and everything. You've got a good reason I guess for building the shed to begin with. I appreciate your civility about coming up here and the way you've approached this and stuff but I'm probably going to have to lean on the side of where the rules are at. I guess. Undestad: Can I add one thing though? Again I mean you can go to the council on that but these types of structures too when they're built without foundations on there, and again being in the area that it's in with the drainage and that, there's potential for a lot of movement. You know hinging off your house. You can be kind of faced with problems quite a while as that thing constantly goes up and down. You know it will pull away from your house. Go back to your house. Kind of the reasons too why you know a lot of the stuff, sheds like this should be put on something a little more stable foundation wise. McDonald: Any further comments? Then I guess at this time we're ready to accept a recommendation. Who'd like to. Undestad: I'll get it here. Recommend the Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-22 for a 7 foot 3 inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition based on the Findings of Fact in the staff report. The Planning Commission further directs that number 1, the applicant must move the shed. Comply with zoning ordinance. And the applicant must revegetate all removed hard surface as with grass seed or sod. Keefe: Second. McDonald: Okay. Undestad moved, Keefe seconded that the Planning Commission denies Planning Case #07- 22 for a 7 foot 3 inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition, based on the Findings of Fact in the staff report. The Planning Commission further directs that: I . The applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod. Planning Commission Meeting - October 2, 2007 All voted in favor, except Thomas who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 1. McDonald: Okay, motion passes 3 to 1. What I would suggest is you talk with the city staff on this. You have a right to appeal this up to the City Council. The minutes of this particular hearing will go into the packet for the City Council. You may be able to reach a compromise with staff that would work within the ordinance and everything and still accommodate what you want. I think you'll find them very accommodating and try to help give you some you know good ideas as to what to do. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: PARKS & OPEN SPACE, NATURAL RESOURCES ELEMENTS. Public Present: Name Address Tim Erhart 9611 Meadowlark Lane Glenn Stolar Park and Rec Commission Kate Aanenson: Thank you Mr. Chair, members of the Planning Commission. As you know the last year we spent a lot of time going through the evolution of the comprehensive plan, which I'm happy to announce is out and out for press. It did go outlast Friday for jurisdictional review. It is required for 6 month open hearing date, so that time is starting right now. I also wanted to let you know, you do have a hard copy, the entire hard copy in front of you. Just for everybody else, for their knowledge and information, the entire comprehensive plan draft is on the city's web site, so if anybody's interested in reading a particular chapter, I hope you read all the chapters, they can go online and do that. The goal of the public hearing process to get input from our residents to see if we're moving in the right direction and address their concerns. Not only our residents but the jurisdictions that it goes out to, includes the school districts, the watershed districts, DNR, just to name a few. So we're hoping to get positive input, or informative input that we can respond to as we move forward in the process. So as we set up this process we're going to take a couple chapters at a time for you to hold the public hearing and to gather that input and at the end of that process, as we break it down, we'll move into January where we respond in writing to the comments that are received and the staff that it's more appropriately addressed to will also respond so actually you'll have that collection of responses. So whether it goes to engineering or parks and rec or planning, we'll respond to those comments and you can see what those are. Then ultimately your comments will be forwarded up to the City Council for their review and then after we have the 6 month jurisdiction review, it goes up to the Met Council who gets another 60 days to review. So we're looking probably in sometime the first part of July for final adoption. So I just wanted everybody to know there's plenty of time to get comments into the city. If you want to call and speak to the person that would be most appropriate to talk to, whether it's engineering, city forester, the planning department to talk to and get your questions answered. We hope people take the time to review that. So for tonight the first two chapters that we'll be looking at will be the natural resources which includes forestry, natural resources and water resources and then park and rec. The Environmental E STAFF REPORT ��,rzj "3 1 PROPOSAL: Request for an after -the -fact 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the 10 - foot side yard setback requirement for the addition of a shed. C— LOCATION: 8541 Flamingo Dfive Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5'h Addition APPLICANT: David and Julie Schcrle 8541 Flamingo Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 vow a4zti PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit l5evelopment Residential (PUDR) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density 04AZ ACREAGE: 0.33 acres DENSITY: NA SUMNIARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a 2 -foot 9 -inch side yard setback for the construction of a shed. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi judicial decision. Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 2 of 6 PROPOSAL SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 2 -foot 9 -inch side yard setback. The Zoning Ordinance requires a I 0 -foot side yard setback on all properties in the Lake Susan Hills Subdivision. The property is zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential Single Family (PUD - R). It is located on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5b Addition west of Powers Boulevard. 'Me applicant received a "Stop Work Order" issued by a City building inspector, as it was obvious that the shed did not meet the I 0 -foot side yard setback requirement. The applicant came to City Hall and inquired about the setback and then applied for a variance. Upon inspection of the property on September 6, 2007, staff noticed that the amount of impervious surface on the property clearly exceeded the hard surface coverage maximum allowed in that development. Staff notified the applicant of the impervious surface maximum requirement and the applicant worked with staff to bring the impervious surface coverage into compliance. The applicant began construction of the shed because he purchased a larger motorcycle and no longer had space in his two -car garage to house it This is a self-created hardship. Staff is recommending denial of the applicant's request based on the fact that the applicant has reasonable use of the property. Reasonable use is defined as a single-family home with a two -car garage, which is currently constructed on the property. There are alternative locations for the shed. One alternative is to locate the shed behind the garage rather than on the side. This would eliminate the need for a variance. Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 3 of 6 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS • Chapter 20, Division 3, Variances • Lake Susan Hills West PLJD Development Contract • Section 20-506 (b) Standards and guidelines for single-family detached residential PUD, Minimum lot size * Section 20-615 (6) RSF District Requirements; Setbacks BACKGROUND The property is located on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5a' Addition, which is zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R). The subject property has an area of 14,374.8 square feet. It has a lot frontage of 69 feet and an average depth of 156.09 feet. Minimum lot dimensions required by ordinance are an average of 15,000 square -foot lot size for the entire PUD, 90 -foot lot frontage and I 00 -foot lot depth. Since discussion between staff and the homeowner began, the applicant has reduced the hardcover on the property to bring it into compliance with city code. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the I 0 -foot side yard setback requirement for the addition of a shed attached to the north side of his garage. The shed is 6 -feet 3 -inches by 20 -feet 5 -inches, which would require a 3 -foot 9 -inch variance, but the eaves of the garage overhang 12 inches off the side of the shed. Eaves, generally, may encroach 2 feet 6 inches into a required setback when the structure meets the 10 -foot required setback. However, if a variance is requested, then the allowed eave encroachment no longer applies to the property. The eave overhang must be part of the variance request, resulting in a setback of 2 feet 9 inches, rather than 3 feet 9 inches. While the footprint and eaves of the shed extend 7 feet 3 inches into the setback, the shed has a net floor area less than 120 square feet. Therefore, the structure does not have to meet building code requirements and does not require a building permit. However, all improvements must meet zoning regulations such as setback requirements, dramage and utility easement encroachment and hard surface coverage requirements. The applicant constructed the shed without contacting the City or the City's website and received a Stop Work Order from one of the City's building inspectors. A Residential Zoning Permit acts as a safety net to identify prior to construction any potential code violations, including but not limited to setbacks and hard surface coverage requirements. This permit is at no cost to the homeowner and allows the City and the homeowner an opportunity to correct any encroachments or violation before installation begins. It is the contractor/homeowner's responsibility to contact the City prior to construction and obtain a Residential Zoning Permit to ensure compliance with City Code. Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 4 of 6 Staff called Gopher State for a locate to determine whether any public utilities were in the drainage and utility easement; none were identified in that easement. Site Characteristics The applicant currently has a shed in the rear yard as well as a two -car garage which could house the motorcycle. There are not topographical or pre-existing characteristics on the site that would constitute undue hardship or the need for a variance. The homeowner has worked diligently to remove much of the hard cover on the property to comply with the impervious surface requirement: an accessory driveway, concrete behind proposed shed, shed behind garage, retaining wall along removed driveway, and retaining wall around garden. Permitted Use The site is zoned PUD -R, Planned Unit Development -Residential. The Lake Susan Hills West PUD development contract approved November 19, 1987 states that "Single family lots shall be developed in accordance with the uses, standards, and requirements of the RSF (Single Family Residential) Zoning District." Reasonable use of a property within the RSF district is a single- family home with a two -car garage, which is currently constructed on the property. An accessory structure to store vehicles is not considered to be a necessity. Accessory structures are permitted provided they meet the zoning requirements for that lotIdevelopment. A shed could be built behind the garage. However, the applicant would have to remove more impervious surface to allow for this addition. The shed for which the variance has been applied for is currently on a concrete slab, which could be removed allowing the necessary square footage for a separate shed addition. VARIANCES WITHIN 500 FEET There are no variance requests for properties within 500 feet of the subject property. There were four variance requests within the Lake Susan Hills West Subdivision located on the west side of Powers Boulevard: CASE # jODDRESS REQUEST DECISION & CONDITION 98-10 1520 Heron Drive 28 -foot front yard setback for a Approved: pool (2' Variance) screen bottom of pool 22 -foot rear yard setback for Approved: 99-05 8451 Pelican Court three -season porch on existing demonstrate existing deck can support deck (8' Variance) porch without structural changes 02-01 1420 Heron Drive 23 -foot front yard setback for a Approved: third garage stall (T Variance) No Conditions Approved: 03-06 8632 Flamingo Drive 36.7% Hard Surface Coverage 1) Work with city forester for additional trees and/or shrubs for accessory structures 2) no future conversion other than to green space Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 5 of 6 Should the Planning Commission approve a variance, the following issues must be addressed: the applicant must get an encroachment agreement to be within the drainage and utility easement; and the applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod. This could set a precedent within the neighborhood, and findings of fact would need to be created to support the approval. FINDINGS The Planning Commission 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 these criteria. Finding. The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of die property, a single-family home, and a two -car garage are constructed on the property. An alternate storage area could be constructed and comply with City Code. 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 this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the PUD -R zoning district. All properties within the Lake Susan Hills West development must maintain a 10 -foot side yard setback. When the subdivision was platted in 1987, the developer had to demonstrate that a 60' by 60' house pad could fit on each lot within the required setbacks. 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.* The purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding. The alleged hardship of encroaching into the side yard setback is a self-created hardship. The desire for the proposed shed is based on the purchase of a motorcycle and indoor storage. An accessory building is allowed within the buildable area provided it meets the zoning requirements. The applicant has reasonable use of the property, a single-family house and a two -car garage, as well as another shed in the rear yard of the property. The proposed variance is for convenience, rather than necessity. Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 6 of 6 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 variance may be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. The shed crowds the common property line to the North reducing the required separation between buildings. 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 may impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, due to the close proximity of the structure to the property line. Staff recornmends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "Me Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-22, for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the required I 0 -foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4 Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West P Addition, based on the findings of fact in the staff report. The Planning Commission further directs that: 1. The applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod." ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced copy of lot survey. 4. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. g:\pIan\2007 plarir�ng cw�\07-22 schale varimce\flamingo vu repan.dm CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND ACTION IN RE: Application of David and Julie Scherle for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance for the addition of a shed — Planning Case No. 07-22. On October 2, 2007, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the Application of David and Julie Scherle for 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance for the addition of a shed at 8541 Flamingo Drive, located in the Planned Unit Development Residential District (PUD -R) at Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance that was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I . The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development Residential (PUD -R). 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential — Low Density (Net Density Range 1.2 — 4u/Acre). 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition. 4. 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. The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, and a two -car garage are constructed on the property. An alternate storage area could be constructed and comply with City Code. b. The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the PUDR zoning district. All properties within the Lake Susan Hills West development must maintain a 10 foot side yard setback. When the subdivision was platted in 1987, the developer had to demonstrate that a 60 by 60 house pad could fit on each lot with in die required setbacks. c. The purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. d. The alleged hardship of encroaching into the side yard setback is a self-created hardship. The desire for the proposed shed is based on die purchase of a motorcycle and indoor storage. An accessory building is allowed within the buildable area provided it meets the zoning requirements. The applicant has reasonable use of the property, a single funfly house and a two car garage, as well as another shed in the rear yard of the property. The proposed variance is for convenience, rather than necessity. e. The variance maybe detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Since the shed crowds the common property line to the North and reducing the required separation between buildings. f. The proposed variation may impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, due to the close proximity of the structure to the property line. 5. The planning report #07-22 Variance dated October 2,2007, prepared by Angie Auseth, et al, is incorporated herein. ACTION "The Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-22, for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance fi-om the required 10 -foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4 Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 54'Addition, based on the findings of fact in the staff report. The Planning Commission further directs that: 1. The applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surfitce areas with grass seed or sod." ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 2nd day of October, 2007. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION M Its Chairman g:xplan\2007 planrdng cw�\07-22 schffle varimceTindings of fact.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard - P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION Email: -- ,r-A e,r Lp-e A h;, Planning Case No.0 -7 Owner Name and Address: ,!�'A rn J= - CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED AUG 3 0 2007 Cttkl`1HP,SSM PIANW10 DE=rl Contact: Phone: Fax: Email: NOTE: Consultation with City staff is required prior to submittal, including review of development plans Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Interim Use Permit (IUP) Non -conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development* Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review (SPR)* Subdivision* Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC) _X_ Variance (VAR) 7 -'0 - Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign - $200 (City to install and remove) X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost" - $50 CUPISPRIVACIVARIWAP/Mates & Bounds - $450 Minor SUB TOTAL FEE$ PC( C" (,-_'aZ3 An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to theapplicant prior to the public hearing. *Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital copy in TIFF -Group 4 (*.tif) format. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: I -o+ I/ ;!�!, I j< / L� ffe- q, k; //�s 1j,- s* 67t" A.), 42-cLrvvr- 6oL-ki 41 �ifj TOTAL ACREAGE: WETLANDS PRESENT: —YES _x NO PRESENTZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST:_ Ll 141 4 6;de :S1-]l7-bC1d< 7Vbr -SAe-d 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 spec"fic ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A Written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. 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 requesL 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 Owners Duplicate Certificate of Tille, 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 rDy '4_r� '13-3t)-07 of Fee �M Date D - 0 Date GlpLAMD�s\Developrrient Review Applimtion.DOC Rev, 12105 Written Statements that answer all six of the findings for granting a variance. A) That the literal enforcement of this Chapter would cause undue hardship. "Undue hardship" means the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. With the purchase of our new motorcycle, we found we were not able to fit this in our ,aara-e alon- with our 2 cars. Putting a shed on the side of our garage would be the 0 0 Most logical place to house our motorcycle, making it easily accessible. Due to the pie shape of our property however, we would only be able to build this shed 4 1/2feet away from the property line, thus, making it impossible to meet the std. fl. allowance. B) That the condition upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. This is a unique situation due to the shape of our property. C) That the purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of our property. See 'D' below for further explanation. D) That the alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Due to a back issue caused by the vibration of our previous smaller motorcycle; David has recently found it necessary to purchase a bigger motorcycle with minimal to no vibration. As a result, we are unable to fit this in our garage. We have concluded that our best option would be to add a shed next to our garage. E) That 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 of land is located. This shed would not be detrimental to public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. F) That the purposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, etc... The height of this shed is under the soffit of our garage and therefore will not impair light or air to adjacent property. We have discussed this shed with the Abels adjacent to our property and they have no objections. '34 '938,36 alp-, -9 -45). 6 ?ae' yq V bit ROVED, BY, DEPT-. 0 DAIS 0. SY, wil, '05 "J# sy-6 UTD 00 MAL PROPOSED HOUSE ELEVATION 900.0 Denotes Existing Elevotidn 4th: Level Elevation:'912.25 -(Jg�> Denotes Proposed Elevation 3rd Level Elevation: 93745 �_ Denotes Drainage & Utility Easement — —Denotes Drainage Flow Direction Top of Bloc.k. Elevation: 940.36 -o-. Denotes Monument Garage Slabs Elevatlon:,940�03 a Denotes Offset Hub Bearings shown are assumed LOT 4 BLOCK 1 LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA I hereby certily that this sis 5T ,m, plan ., esi,ut .9. p.",d bY -0 0, under nsy ADDITION under the finnof thtShots at Mirnes.a.. Voted this 7o4i\d".f 141AMIL A.D. 19 �z Scal*e:. 1 R0BEFtT1WSM~ REG. NO..14891 0, 1422 Enterpri she Drive PIONEER Mendota Heights. MN 55120 (612) BBI -1914 -Fax —nf _ng .681-9488 e; 41 3 1-3 F1 625 Hicithway 10 Northeast Blaine. MN 55434 (612) 783 -1880 -Fox 783-1,883 bertiticafe of Survey for: Joseph M. Mil -ler Construction Co. House Address: Owhanhassen. MN Model Narne: vrincTon j fyfe 17 Genie, C-�+vi is 7X 'C!, _&i 6' 4b I A I. V dN 141�, '34 '938,36 alp-, -9 -45). 6 ?ae' yq V bit ROVED, BY, DEPT-. 0 DAIS 0. SY, wil, '05 "J# sy-6 UTD 00 MAL PROPOSED HOUSE ELEVATION 900.0 Denotes Existing Elevotidn 4th: Level Elevation:'912.25 -(Jg�> Denotes Proposed Elevation 3rd Level Elevation: 93745 �_ Denotes Drainage & Utility Easement — —Denotes Drainage Flow Direction Top of Bloc.k. Elevation: 940.36 -o-. Denotes Monument Garage Slabs Elevatlon:,940�03 a Denotes Offset Hub Bearings shown are assumed LOT 4 BLOCK 1 LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA I hereby certily that this sis 5T ,m, plan ., esi,ut .9. p.",d bY -0 0, under nsy ADDITION under the finnof thtShots at Mirnes.a.. Voted this 7o4i\d".f 141AMIL A.D. 19 �z Scal*e:. 1 R0BEFtT1WSM~ REG. NO..14891 CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MRTNESOTA) ) ss' COUNTY OF CARVER ) 1, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on September 20, 2007, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for the Scherle Variance — Planning Case 2007-22 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. C Karen J. Engetaht, Depu4 Clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me thisa'& day of g5d%Aew\6,r 2007. �r' tj KIM I MEUWISSEN -Minnesota T Notary Public m" My Cmmission Exopims Jw 31, 2DJO Notary Public 9 2 Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, October 2, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later In the evening, depending on the order of the agenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for after -the -fact Variance to a side yard setback to Proposal: construct a garage addition on property zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R) Applicant: David & Julie Scherle Property 8541 Flamingo Drive Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing through the following steps: at the Meeting: I . Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/plan/�7-22.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Questions & Auseth by email at aauseth @ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1132. 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. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedunt: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews. Conditional and Interim Uses, Weiland Alterations, Flazonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that Includes all pertinent Information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request, At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The Item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process, The Commissionwill close the public hearing and discuss the Item and make a recommendation to the City Council, The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify Wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/inclustrial. • Minnesota State statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting, • A neighborhood spokespersontrepresentative is encouraged to provide a Contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal, Staff Is also available to review the project with any interested pemon(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. lfyouwishtohave something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person nRmed on the notification. Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, October 2, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of the agenda. Location: _ City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for after -the -fact Variance to a side yard setback to Proposal: construct a garage addition on property zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R) Applicant: David & Julie Scherle Property 8541 Flamingo Drive Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing through the following steps: at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.cl.chanhassen.mn.us/sery/plan/07-22.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Questions & Auseth by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1132. 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. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Weiland Alterations, Razonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission, City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application In writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that Includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports am available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation, The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission wIll close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse. affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commerciallinclustrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard, Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an Item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting, • A neighborhood spokespersontrepresantative is encouraged to provide a contact for the City. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council, If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. — 171 CO so 0 0- kk This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a sumey and is ran intended to be used as, me. Thus mi is a completion Of records, information and data located in varous city, county, Mate and federal offices; and other sources negumfing me area sho", and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not "mart that the Ceographic, Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error thice, and the City does not represent that Me GIS Data can be used far namgasuonai tracIdng or my other purpose requiring Mcacting me.suamment of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. N whole or am found pleame contact 952-227-1107. �e Preceding dsciaimer is pachniled! punsuarat to Minnesota Statutes §466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this man aclai0aledges; that the Qt, shall not be liable far my damages, and! expressly �M; all clean, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and al claims brought by User. its employees or agarms, or third parties �hkflh arise M of the usees access or use of data phandedi 0 CIL This mal, is neither a legally raccanded me,ii aa� a wrwy sand is hot infested W bi,, used Me ohm. This Map is a completion of records, information and data I"ed in variant city, county, seems and federal Offices and offie, samcoa regarding Via mass shiain. anal is to be used for reference, purposes bay. The OtY does nat "ment Met the G�cograqphtc Information System (GIS) Data used to papers, this maid she error has, wd Me City does not represent Met this GIS Data cm be used for narigational. backing w my other whposse m0fiN Messing hymemement of distance or direction or precows, in the depiction of geograpilve features. R mass 01 dscireparcies am found pleame contact �-�7-1107. The Preceding Cisclawne, is plohnfled pumand to Hnneacha Slatifies §466.W. Subcd 21 (2000), andl the user of this mes, ackmaitedges, that the City shall not W liable far any dannages, and topressly t�neh,as all claims, and agness to defend, indemnify. and! hold harafiesus Me City firms my send at cleashe brought by User. as employees � agents. � third panduse �hich mi W d Me Must,, c,,Ma or use, a "a pahricedl. JOHN C & MAUREEN W JENSEN SCOTT A & STEPHANIE W FISHER CAROLYN SUERTH HUDSON 8480 PELICAN CT 1451 HERON DR 8481 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8529 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 JEFFREY T & AMY B SMITH GREGORY D & ANNE M HUNSAKER CHAD D & SARAH R NICKLESS 8590 FLAMINGO DR 1440 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1420 MALLARD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8548 WILEY J & DENISE R WILKINSON KEVIN DOWNEY & BARBARA J LARSON a481 IBIS CT COURTNEY GREER-DOWNEY 8470 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8521 1400 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8506 THOMAS A & CHERYL K NIEBELING JON P & RAYETTE A RYDOUIST CHRISTINA M DETERMAN 8491 IBIS CT 1410 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1441 HERON DR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8521 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -a5O6 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -8529 KENNETH J & KARI D OXONEK ROSS A& NATALIA J HUSEBY JEFFREY J & MERRILEE A ZAHN 1421 HERON DR 1431 HERON DR 8461 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -11528 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -B528 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8507 BETH FRIENDSHUH & ADAM J FEUERHELM & JAMES A & TAMMY R THOMPSON SEAN P HEUSINKVELD JAMIE S FEUERHELM 8511 FLAMINGO DR 8471 PELICAN CT 8550 MERGANSER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8546 TIMOTHY T & MOLLY C AMBROSE KEVIN W & ROBYN M WINNEROSKI TIMOTHY C & ANN B MCGEE 1421 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1460 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1411 MALLARD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8539 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -a5O6 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8548 GREGORY C & KIMBERLY A HAYES JON R & HOPE A SMITH ROBERT L & SOPHIA P WHIMS a542 FLAMINGO DR 1421 MALLARD CT 11556 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -a540 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -11548 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -11540 DOUGLAS DEAN JACOBSON & RAMONA JEAN JACOBSON JUDITH ROSE ANDERSON LISA M JERECZEK B551 MERGANSER CT 8584 FLAMINGO DR 8571 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8546 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -15523 RONALD J & SUE E BUSCH DAVID M & AMY R BURKHOLDER WEI LEONG DANIEL TAN& 8521 FLAMINGO DR AUDREY P BURKHOLDER STEPHANIE H C LEE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -5523 1450 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8551 FLAMINGO DR ZANHASSEN, CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 MN 55317 JEFFREY T & AMY B SMITH GREGORY D & ANNE M HUNSAKER CHAD D & SARAH R NICKLESS 8590 FLAMINGO DR 1440 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1420 MALLARD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8548 WILEY J & DENISE R WILKINSON KEVIN DOWNEY & BARBARA J LARSON a481 IBIS CT COURTNEY GREER-DOWNEY 8470 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8521 1400 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8506 THOMAS A & CHERYL K NIEBELING JON P & RAYETTE A RYDOUIST CHRISTINA M DETERMAN 8491 IBIS CT 1410 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1441 HERON DR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8521 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -a5O6 CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -8529 KENNETH J & KARI D OXONEK ROSS A& NATALIA J HUSEBY JEFFREY J & MERRILEE A ZAHN 1421 HERON DR 1431 HERON DR 8461 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -11528 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -B528 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8507 BETH FRIENDSHUH & ADAM J FEUERHELM & JAMES A & TAMMY R THOMPSON SEAN P HEUSINKVELD JAMIE S FEUERHELM 8511 FLAMINGO DR 8471 PELICAN CT 8550 MERGANSER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8546 TIMOTHY T & MOLLY C AMBROSE KEVIN W & ROBYN M WINNEROSKI TIMOTHY C & ANN B MCGEE 1421 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1460 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1411 MALLARD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8539 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -a5O6 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8548 GREGORY C & KIMBERLY A HAYES JON R & HOPE A SMITH ROBERT L & SOPHIA P WHIMS a542 FLAMINGO DR 1421 MALLARD CT 11556 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -a540 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -11548 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -11540 DOUGLAS DEAN JACOBSON & RAMONA JEAN JACOBSON JUDITH ROSE ANDERSON LISA M JERECZEK B551 MERGANSER CT 8584 FLAMINGO DR 8571 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8546 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -15523 JEROME R & MARY GEN REUTZEL KURT P & GAIL M VINJE MARTIN J & TANYA MEIERS 1481 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8596 FLAMINGO DR 8570 TERN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8541 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8647 DANA P & KRISTINE L KALLMAN ROBERT T & DENISE G HEISE STEVEN H & DENISE L MYSTER 1501 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8591 FLAMINGO DR 8571 TERN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8538 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -a547 JOHN & SUSAN SCHULTZ STEVEN J & DEBORAH A SALERNO JEFFREY P OLDENKAMP & 1430 MALLARD CT 8440 EGRET CT PAMELA C OLDENKAMP CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -11548 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8508 1341 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8504 RACHEL L ROBINSON MICHAEL A & GINA M HAMARI STUART C & TANYA M BROWN 1351 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1390 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1420 HERON DR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -&504 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -M3 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -11525 KEVIN B & SHERYL L HLANG KURT HEINRICH KAUDY JAMES & GAIL KFIONMILLER 1361 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8450 PELICAN CT 8460 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8504 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -M7 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -&507 TERRY W & BARBARA A BOLEN ANISH H & NAMRATA A SHAH GARY P & ANGELA J MAGNUSON 8451 PELICAN CT 1420 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1411 HERON DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -&%7 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -85D6 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8528 JOEL A & LISA A HILGENDORF MARK A & JANE M ABEL PATRICK J & BETH M VICTORIAN 1430 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8531 FLAMINGO OR 8530 MERGANSER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -W23 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8546 DENNIS W & DEBRA C WALLACH STEVEN T SCHARFENBERG & ROGER H SMALLBECK 8528 FLAMINGO DR BARBARA M SCHARFENBERG 1431 MALLARD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 65317 -11540 1470 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8548 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8-� KEITH A PICHELMAN ROBERT J & RENAE A HOERNEMANN KAREN M RODRIGUEZ 8631 MERGANSER CT 1480 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8561 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8546 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8523 ELLING C & MONICA H OLSON BRANDON & STACEY JENC DEAN M & ALLISON C NELSON 8570 FLAMINGO DR 8530 TERN CT 8560 TERN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8547 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 43547 ERIK BODEN PEDERSEN & STEVEN D & LORI C MILEWSKI TODD T & KRISTI LYNN WODEK ROSEMARIE DENISE PEDERSEN 8602 FLAMINGO DR 8551 TERN CT aS81 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8558 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8547 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -11523 MICHAEL STEPHEN SCHMID & JILL RAEANN SCHMID 8599 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 BJARNE H LEE & BONNIE E PASCUAL LEE 8600 KINGFISHER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8545 DAVID W & JULIE A SCHERLE 8541 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 MOHAMMAD 0 IMAM & RUBINA RAFAT 8607 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8559 JUDY T NEWMAN 8615 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 4559 TIMOTHY M & LOIS M VOLD 8620 KINGFISHER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 5W17 -8645 ROBERT E & CHRISTI M NORDBY SW KINGFISHER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 4545 PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION AREA (500 FEET) 8541 FLAMINGO DRIVE SCHERLE VARIANCE REQUEST PLANNING CASE 2007-22 2422 Enterprise Dri e -jK Mendota Heights. MvN 55120 PIONEER LAND SURVEYORS - CML ENGINEERS (612) 681 -1914 -Fax 681-9488 LANDSCAPE ARO-11TECTS engineerl'ng--`�N` PL�`"E'ls 625 Highway 10 Northeast Blaine, MN 55434 1(612) 783 -1880 -Fox 783-1883 Certificate of Survey for: Joseph M. Mille.r Construction Co. 11 House Address: hanhossen, MN Model Name: .0 �b 61 L <1\ R 3 ')38 938ro 0 A ,a -9 .0 lb Ik /'P ApppOVED �z \!IQ ds� BY, 0 937.4 DEPT2 DAIE1 > BY% DWTt PROPOSED HOUSE ELEVATION 900.0 Denotes Existing Elevation 4th Level Elevation: 932.25 -(i� Denotes Proposed Elevation 3rd Level Elevation:-6-371� Denotes Drainage & Utility Easement Denotes Drainage Flow Direction Top of Block Elevation: 940.36 ---o— Denotes Monument Garage Slab Elevation: 940.03 e Denotes Offset Hub Bearings shown are assumed LOT 4 BLOCK 1 LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA 5TH ADDITION I hereby certify that this survey, plan or re6ort was prepared by me or under my dIrsrmpen;tVurranzf-r?w I am aury Pfeififf"r d Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 7-043t\dayof V\41V`S� A.D. 19 !)Z Lot-% Scale: 1 hlmh-30fevell ROSERT(W.-91V^HU�A' REG. NO. 14991 116� FW: Variance Request Subject: FW: Variance Request From: "Auseth, Angie" <aauseth@ci.chanhassen.rnn.us> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:22:07 -0500 To: )scherlegearthlink.net" <jscherIe@earthIink.rvet> Mr. Scherle, I need some additional information in order to process your variance application: I . An updated survey of you property which reflects the size and location of the shed in the rear yard and behind the garage 2. The over all hard surface coverage on your property. a. A table of the current hard surface brake down i.e. house, driveway, sheds, retaining walls, etc. b. A breakdown of what you have removed to bring the hard surface coverage into compliance. 3. Verify the length and width of the shed you are requesting the setback variance for including the length of the roof eaves. I need this information no later than 12:00 pm, Monday, September 17, 2007. Please contact me with any question you may have. Best regards, Angie Angie Auseth Planner I City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Blvd Chanhassen, MN 55317 Direct dial: 952-227-1132 Fax: 952-227-1110 email: aausethCcDci.chanhassen.mn.us Website: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us I of 1 9/16/2007 11:05 AM 2422 Enterprise Drive G Mendota Heights, MN 55120 PIONEER LAND SURVEYORS - CIVIL ENGINEERS (612) 681 -1914 -Fox 681-94BB LAND PLANAERS - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 625 Ig "y 1 0 Northeast Blain "' IVIN 55434 (012) 783 -1880 -Fox 783-1883 Certificate of Survey for: Joseph M. Miller Construction Co. House Address: MN Model No me: %D -A �b " %P P)l <I\ I- APC 0 A -P q�?' A Q A r 938 -138.36 A 93910 "P491 1:1 10 -0 0 ..a 937,36 ro 045� /'P \0 ApppOVED 'b BY, 00 DEPT: DATEz >S1 By, DEPT - DATE: -26' T5 T13 wag.. PROPOSED HOUSE ELEVATION 900.0 Denotes Existing Elevation 4th Level Elevation; 932.25 Denotes Proposed Elevation 3rd Level Elevatlon:-9-371� Denotes Drainage & Utility Easement Denotes Drainage Flow Direction Top of Block Elevation: 940.36 Denotes Monument Garage Slab Elevation: 940.03 Denotes Offset Hub Bearings shown are assumed LOT 4 BLOCK 1 LAKE SUSAN HILLS WESL CARVER COUNTY. MINNESOTA 5TH ADDITION I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my am Duty PtW§iTT@T5d Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 7-04i\d.v.f A.D. 19 4)Z Scale: 1 imc-h-30Lelt ROBE REG. NO. 14691 Planning Case No. 0 -7 _CD4��)kl CITY OF CHANHASSEN P.O. Box 147 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, IVIN 55317 — (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION PKIN I Owner Name and Address: V I CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED AUG 3 0 2007 clikNW.SSEN I'Lolpi Na Phonecl,sp.-31o'S�-fto Fax: Phone: Fax: Email: � - J �c Ae-d-e-e r—om Email: NOTE: Consultation with City staff is required prior to submittal, including review of development plans Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Interim Use Permit (IUP) Non -conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development* Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review (SPR)* Subdivision* Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way[Easements (VAC) _X_ Variance (VAR) 7-'o Weiland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign - $200 (City to install and remove) X Escrow for Filing Fees/Altomey Cost" - $50 CUP/SPRIVACNARNVAP/Metes & Bounds - $450 Minor SUB TOTALIFEE$ PC[ Cf ---4 1,303 An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the -applicant prior to the public hearing. *Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital copy in TIFF -Group 4 (*.tif) format. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: q. / LqKe- A). ��rver- 60'-^41 "IV TOTALACREAGE: WETLANDS PRESENT: YES —X NO PRESENT ZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: Ll '/.% 4+- 6;de :Se±12r1r-1< -Vbr -"�Aed This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or dearly printed and must be accompanied by all inforaiation 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 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 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 virill 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 n M 07 UNEMMA Date 1?- 3 o -c;7 9--60-0-7 Date WpLANV�s\Development Review Application.DOC Rev. 12105 PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 1-04- '/., P_->jZ< / L-Rffe- 6c-�qlj k; /L5 O�S* A). -�2_,trver- C_0"kl4l "Al TOTALACREAGE: WETLANDS PRESENT: —YES x NO PRESENT ZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: — Ll //.A 4 6 ; '/'Z :S' + 1, " C_ k �p r -S A e- d 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 spedfic ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. 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 Owners 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 �Z� _'/ �9- 30-D7 of A Ii I Date S- -3 0 - v;7 9 - --7, 0 - 0 of Fee OyrneF- Date GAPLANVOmsTevelopment Review Appli�bon.DOC Rev. 12J05 Written Statements that answer all six of the findings for granting a variance. A) That the literal enforcement of this Chapter would cause undue hardship. "Tjndue hardship" means the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. With the purchase of our new motorcycle, we found we were not able to fit this in our garage along with our 2 cars. Putting a shed on the side of our garage would be the most logical place to house our motorcycle, making it easily accessible- Due to the pie shape of our property however, we would only be able to build this shed 4 V, feet away from the property line, thus, making it impossible to meet the std. fl. allowance. B) That the condition upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. This is a unique situation due to the shape of our property. C) That the purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of our property- See 'D' below for further explanation. D) That the alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Due to a back issue caused by the vibration of our previous smaller motorcycle; David has recently found it necessary to purchase a bigger motorcycle with minimal to no vibration. As a result, we are unable to fit this in our garage. We have concluded that our best option would be to add a shed next to our garage. E) That 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 of land is located. This shed would not be detrimental to public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. F) That the purposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, etc... The height of this shed is under the soffit of our garage and therefore will not impair light or air to adjacent property. We have discussed this shed with the Abels adjacent to our property and they have no objections. Written description of the variance request We would like a variance for a shed to be build 4 V2 fl away from our property line. 2422 Enterprise DO" Mendoto Heights. MN 55120 PIONEER �D WR�S O� ENWN� (612) 681 -1914 -Fox 681-9488 625 Highway 10 Nmtheast Blaine, MN 55434 (812) 783 -1880 -Fox 783-1883 Certificate of Survey for: Joseph M. Miller Construction Co. House Address: Whanhossen. MN Model Narne: vrincton j (Fevvla� CO-4*v) 'b /�38' (a 6' �T' /'tot to 16, A 038 1> 3t. .0 a yq -9-373C. A' ApPROVED \0 0- 0� DATE1 to Sit DeTt DATE J -26- T5 PROPOSED HOUSE ELEVATION 900.0 Denotes Existing Elevation A@�O Denotes 4th' Level Elevation: Proposed Elevation _U2.25 Denotes Drainage & Utility Easement 3rd Level Elevation: 9,37.15 Denotes Drainage Flow Direction Top of Block Elevation: 940.36 ---a— Denotes Monument Garage Slab Eleyetion:,940.03 Denotes Offset Hub Bearings shown are assumed LOT 4 BLOCK 1 LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA 5TH ADDITION I heneby tily that thh,urnry, pis. *� rem,t we, Pleas� bY ene 01tendelmd-1-uml-1-1--na 1-1-1 urt6er the 1.01 the Ststlat Ml,.Mt.. Dtn� thl. 1-041d.1.1 1`4\1ML A.D. 19 211 Scale: 1 Ln --h,4Q ROBCqT�l REG. NO. 14991 CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) 1, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on September 20, 2007, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for the Scherle Variance — Planning Case 2007-22 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 thisaloW day of )g!fAej-A6z- 2007. Notary Kardn J. Enge"t, Depu� Clerk SSEN ta KIM T. MEUWl Notary Public -Minnesota My Gmnsslon E)om Jw 31, 2010 Notice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, October 2, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. This hearing may not start until later in the evenIn , depending on the order of the agenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for after -the -fact Variance to a side yard setback to Proposal: construct a garage addition on property zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R) Applicant: David & Julie Scherle Property 8541 Flamingo Drive Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the What Happens public hearing through the following steps: at the Meeting: 1 . Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. at the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the Citys projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/plan/07-22.html. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Questions & Auseth by email at aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Comments: phone at 952-227-1132. If you choose to submit written Comments: comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation, The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercialAndustrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519 99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokespersontrepresentative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested persons). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. — Date & Time: Tuesday, October 2, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. This hearing may not start until later in the evening, depending on the order of the agenda. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for after -the -fact Variance to a side yard setback to Proposal: construct a garage addition on property zoned Planned Unit DeveloPment-Residential (PUD -R) Applicant: David & Julie Scherle Property 8541 Flamingo Drive Location: A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: What Happens 1 ' Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. at the Meeting: 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the City's projects web page at: www.cl.chanhassen.mn.us/serv/r)lan/07-22.htmi. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie Auseth by email at aauseth @ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by Questions & phone at 952-227-1132. It you choose to submit written Comments: comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. The staff report for this Item will be available online on the project web site listed above the Thursday prior to the Planning Commission meeting. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting. staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item Vill be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation, Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercialAndustrial. • Minnesota State statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting • A neighborhood spokespersonlrepresentative Is encouraged to provide a contact for the city, Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Plannino Staff person named on the notification. — ob to �i 0 (L SILBJECT Unsciatmer This map is nether a �grffly recorded! map nor a surrey and is not intended to be used as me, This map is a cornhilayon of records, information and data located! in various city, county. state and West offices and other sai refill the was Shi and is to be beed! for reference purposes only. The City does not yerant that the Goographic Information System DIS) Data new to prepam iffis onsp are error free and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational. tharlung or any other purpose requiring exiening measurement of distance or directon or precism, in the deli of geographic features. " emote or discrepancies am found please contact 91 Th. Presiding dbacla,me, is prooW pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §4ffi 03. Sued 21 (2000), and the user of this map wanchiledges that the City shot net he liable for any damages, and evressly ,iieves all come, and agrees to defend, indemnity, and hold hanorless the City from any and all clanne brought by Use, its ennibloyies or elfents, or tord parties "ich arse but 0 the users access or use of data provided, 0 (L AT -110" Tons mato is nother a legally recomed map nor a sur,ory and is not intended to be used as one This not is a combilatron of records. information and data located in vanous cly, county. state and faceral Officie, and other sources reiterating Me area sloben, and is to bas used for retemme lambasts only The City does not �arrahl that the Geoc,rai Information System (GIS) Data used to preloary this map are cour free and the City does not maresent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational tracl,litip or any other ouraose retuning re,act;ng Measurement of distance or direchon or precision in the del of goolfrali features If effors or discrepancies am found please contact 952-227-1107 The preceding deselanner is prowdex! purtuarin to Minnesota Statutes §466 03, Subd 21 (2000). and the user of this rhim acknoWedges that the City shall not be liable for any damages. and ememsey yerves all darms, and agmes to defend, noternif, and hold harniffess the City from any and at claims brought by User. its employers or agents. or thind parties "i area out 0 the sees access or use of data pio,,ded JOHN C & MAUREEN W JENSEN SCOTT A & STEPHANIE W FISHER CAROLYN SUERTH HUDSON 8480 PELICAN CT 1451 HERON DR 8481 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8507 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8529 CHANHASSEN, MIN 55317 -B507 RONALD J & SUE E BUSCH DAVID M & AMY R BURKHOLDER WEI LEONG DANIEL TAN & a521 FLAMINGO DR AUDREY P BURKHOLDER STEPHANIE H C LEE CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8523 1450 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8551 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -85DG CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 JEFFREY T & AMY B SMITH GREGORY D & ANNE M HUNSAKER CHAD D & SARAH R NICKLESS 8590 FLAMINGO DR 1440 LAKE SUSAN HILLS OR 1420 MALLARD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8548 WILEY J & DENISE A WILKINSON KEVIN DOWNEY & BARBARA J LARSON 8481 IBIS CT COURTNEY GREER-DOWNEY 8470 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8521 1400 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 THOMAS A & CHERYL K NIEBELING JON P & RAYETTE A RYDQUIST CHRISTINA M DETERMAN 8491 IBIS CT 1410 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1441 HERON DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8521 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -0506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8529 KENNETH J & KARI D OXONEK ROSS A& NATALIA J H USEBY JEFFREY J & MERRILEE A ZAHN 1421 HERON DR 1431 HERON DR 8461 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8528 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8528 CHANHASSEN, MIN 55317 -8507 BETH FRIENDSHUH & ADAM J FEUERHELM & JAMES A & TAMMY R THOMPSON SEAN P HEUSINKVELD JAMIE S FEUERHEUM 8511 FLAMINGO DR 8471 PELICAN CT 8550 MERGANSER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -a5O7 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8546 TIMOTHY T & MOLLY C AMBROSE KEVIN W & ROBYN M WINNEROSKI TIMOTHY C & ANN B MCGEE 1421 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1460 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 14ll MALLARD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8639 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -B548 GREGORY C & KIMBERLY A HAYES JON R & HOPE A SMITH ROBERT L & SOPHIA P WHIMS 8542 FLAMINGO DR 1421 MALLARD CT 8556 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 4548 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 DOUGLAS DEAN JACOBSON & JUDITH ROSE ANDERSON LISA M JERECZEK RAMONA JEAN JACOBSON 8584 FLAMINGO DR 8571 FLAMINGO DR a551 MERGANSER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -a540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8546 JEROME R & MARY GEN REUTZEL KURT P & GAIL M VINJE MARTIN J & TANYA MEIERS 1481 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8596 FLAMINGO DR a570 TERN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8541 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8547 DANA P & KRISTINE L KALLMAN ROBERT T & DENISE G HEISE STEVEN H & DENISE L MYSTER 1501 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8591 FLAMINGO OR 8571 TERN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8538 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8547 JOHN & SUSAN SCHULTZ STEVEN J & DEBORAH A SALERNO JEFFREY P OLDENKAMP & 1430 MALLARD CT 8440 EGRET CT PAMELA C OLDENKAMP CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8548 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -MB 1341 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8504 RACHEL L ROBINSON MICHAEL A & GINA M HAMARI STUART C & TANYA M BROWN 1351 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1390 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1420 HERON DR CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8504 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8503 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8525 KEVIN B & SHERYL L IHLANG KURT HEINRICH KAUDY JAMES & GAIL KRONMILLER 1361 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8450 PELICAN CT 8460 PELICAN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -a504 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -B507 CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -M7 TERRY W & BARBARA A BOLEN ANISH H & NAMRATA A SHAH GARY P & ANGELA J MAGNUSON 8451 PELICAN CT 1420 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 1411 HERON DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8507 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8528 JOEL A & LISA A HILGENDORF MARK A & JANE M ABEL PATRICK J & BETH M VICTORIAN 1430 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8531 FLAMINGO DR 8530 MERGANSER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -0506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8546 DENNIS W & DEBRA C WALLACH STEVEN T SCHARFENBERG & ROGER H SMALLBECK 8528 FLAMINGO DR BARBARA M SCHARFENBERG 1431 MALLARD CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 1470 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 KEITH A PICHELMAN ROBERT J & RENAE A HOERNEMANN KAREN M RODRIGUEZ 8531 MERGANSER CT 1400 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR 8561 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -B546 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8506 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 ELLING C & MONICA H OLSON BRANDON & STACEY JENC DEAN M & ALLISON C NELSON 8570 FLAMINGO DR 0530 TERN CT 8550 TERN CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8540 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -a547 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 43547 ERIK BODEN PEDERSEN & ROSEMARIE DENISE PEDERSEN STEVEN D & LORI C MILEWSKI TODD T & KRISTI LYNN WODEK 8581 FLAMINGO DR 8602 FLAMINGO DR 8551 TERN CT CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8523 CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8558 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8547 MICHAEL STEPHEN SCHMID & JILL RAEANN SCHMID 8599 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8523 WARNE H LEE & BONNIE E PASCUAL LEE 8600 KINGFISHER CT CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -a545 DAVID W & JULIE A SCHERLE 8541 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -13523 MOHAMMAD 0 IMAM & RUBINA RAFAT 8607 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8559 JUDY T NEWMAN 8615 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -8559 TIMOTHY M & LOIS M VOLD 8620 KINGFISHER CT CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -&545 ROBERT E & CHRISTI M NORDBY 8640 KINGFISHER CT CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -8545 PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION AREA (500 FEET) 8541 FLAMINGO DRIVE SCHERLE VARIANCE REQUEST PLANNING CASE 2007-22 I F,qs� so Ff 6 Y-0 V,- S,q m Hou �V5 / e S Ouse/ 0 tj C� )c 4-t 0 0 I -5.,4L goof -fel-t CetJter 0(n T C� STU� 1 (0 C, tj cem-te 0 Moose - W r ti P. 5"A X e AT jo / Out side- W/0 MI WN ME �-d (lb q -�, LN 4C) Fro/\,/ I P, te X C)o I K C�- �PL pe�,L f:,'5r- EACK I w h � 7-e- I I // RoN up 163 r/a-5,e 00 ,;7 B /i c l<, -7�-jm ArojNl� B(Ot� G- Doc r --s 103 f &A -D 0 C) 1 y I i 5S CITY OF CHANHASSEN P 0 BOX 147 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 09/06/2007 11:32 AM Receipt No. 0050924 CLERK: katie PAYEE: DAVID/JULIE SCHERLE 8541 FLAMINGO DRIVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Scherle Variance Planning Case 07-22 ------------------------------------------------------- Use & Variance 200.00 Recording Fees 50.00 ----------- Total 250.00 Cash 0.00 Check 6303 250.00 Change 'fig mol SCANNED STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for an after -the -fact 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the 10 - foot side yard setback requirement for the addition of a shed. LOCATION: 8541 Flamingo Drive Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5b Addition APPLICANT: David and Julie Scherle 8541 Flamingo Drive Chanhassen, N4N 55317 PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit Development Residential (PUDR) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density ACREAGE: 0.33 acres DENSITY: NA SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a 2 -foot 9 -inch side yard setback for the construction of a shed. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi judicial decision. 6CANNF; Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 2 of 6 PROPOSAL SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 2 -foot 9 -inch side yard setback. The Zoning Ordinance requires a I 0 -foot side yard setback on all properties in the Lake Susan Hills Subdivision. The property is zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential Single Family (PLJD- R). It is located on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5h Addition west of Powers Boulevard. The applicant received a "Stop Work Order"issued by a City building inspector, as it was obvious that the shed did not meet the I 0 -foot side yard setback requirement. The applicant came to City Hall and inquired about the setback and then applied for a variance. Upon inspection of the property on September 6,2007, staff noticed that the amount of impervious surface on the property clearly exceeded the hard surface coverage maximum allowed in that development. Staff notified the applicant of the impervious surface maximum requirement and the applicant worked with staff to bring the impervious surface coverage into compliance. The applicant began construction of the shed because he purchased a larger motorcycle and no longer had space in his two -car garage to house it. This is a self-created hardship. Staff is recommending denial of the applicant's request based on the fact that the applicant has reasonable use of the property. Reasonable use is defined as a single-fmily home with a two -car garage, which is currently constructed on the property. There are alternative locations for the shed. One alternative is to locate the shed behind the garage rather than on the side. This would eliminate the need for a variance. Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 3 of 6 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS • Chapter 20, Division 3, Variances • Lake Susan Hills West PUD Development Contract • Section 20-506 (b) Standards and guidelines for single-family detached residential PUD, Minimum lot size • Section 20-615 (6) RSF District Requirements; Setbacks BACKGROUND The property is located on Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5h Addition, which is zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R). The subject property has an area of 14,374.8 square feet. It has a lot frontage of 69 feet and an average depth of 156.09 feet. Minimum lot dimensions required by ordinance are an average of 15,000 square -foot lot size for the entire PUD, 90 -foot lot frontage and 100 -foot lot depth. Since discussion between staff and the homeowner began, the applicant has reduced the hardcover on the property to bring it into compliance with city code. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the 10 -foot side yard setback requirement for the addition of a shed attached to the north side of his garage. The shed is 6 -feet 3 -inches by 20 -feet 5 -inches, which would require a 3 -foot 9 -inch variance, but the eaves of the garage overhang 12 inches off the side of the shed. Eaves, generally, may encroach 2 feet 6 inches into a required setback when the structure meets the I 0 -foot required setback. However, if a variance is requested, then the allowed eave encroachment no longer applies to the property. The cave overhang must be part of the variance request, resulting in a setback of 2 feet 9 inches, rather than 3 feet 9 inches. While the footprint and eaves of the shed extend 7 feet 3 inches into the setback, the shed has a net floor area less than 120 square feet. Therefore, the structure does not have to meet building code requirements and does not require a building permit. However, all improvements must meet zoning regulations such as setback requirements, drainage and utility easement encroachment and hard surface coverage requirements. The applicant constructed the shed without contacting the City or the City's website and received a Stop Work Order from one of the City's building inspectors. A Residential Zoning Permit acts as a safety net to identify prior to construction any potential code violations, including but not limited to setbacks and hard surface coverage requirements. This permit is at no cost to the homeowner and allows the City and the homeowner an opportunity to correct any encroachments or violation before installation begins. It is the contractor/homeowner's responsibility to contact the City prior to construction and obtain a Residential Zoning Permit to ensure compliance with City Code. Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 4 of 6 Staff called Gopher State for a locate to determine whether any public utilities were in the drainage and utility easement; none were identified in that easement. Site Characteristics The applicant currently has a shed in the rear yard as well as a two -car garage which could house the motorcycle. There are not topographical or pre-existing characteristics on the site that would constitute undue hardship or the need for a variance, The homeowner has worked diligently to remove much of the hard cover on the property to comply with the impervious surface requirement: an accessory driveway, concrete behind proposed shed, shed behind garage, retaining wall along removed driveway, and retaining wall around garden. Permitted Use The site is zoned PUD -R, Planned Unit Development -Residential. The Lake Susan Hills West PUD development contract approved November 19, 1987 states that "Single family lots shall be developed in accordance with the uses, standards, and requirements of the RSF (Single Family Residential) Zoning District." Reasonable use of a property within the RSF district is a single- family home with a two -car garage, which is currently constructed on the property. An accessory structure to store vehicles is not considered to be a necessity. Accessory structures are permitted provided they meet the zoning requirements for that lot/development. A shed could be built behind the garage. However, the applicant would have to remove more impervious surface to allow for this addition. The shed for which the variance has been applied for is currently on a concrete slab, which could be removed allowing the necessary square footage for a separate shed addition. VARIANCES WrrHIN 500 FEET There are no variance requests for properties within 500 feet of the subject property. There were four variance requests within the Lake Susan Hills West Subdivision located on the west side of Powers Boulevard: CASE # ADDIRESS REQUEST DECISION& CONDITION 98-10 1520 Heron Drive 28 -foot front yard setback for a Approved: pool (2' Variance) screen bottom of pool 22 -foot rear yard setback for Approved: 99-05 8451 Pelican Court duve-season porch on existing demonstrate existing dock can support deck (8' Vanance) porch without structural changes 02-01 1420 H eron Drive 23 -foot front yard setback for a Approved: third garage stall (T Vanance) No Conditions Approved: 36.7% Hard Surface Coverage 1) Work with city forester for additional 03-06 8632 Flamingo Drive for accessory structures trees and/or shrubs 2) no future conversion other than to I green space Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 5 of 6 Should the Planning Commission approve a variance, the following issues must be addressed: the applicant must get an encroachment agreement to be within the drainage and utility easement; and the applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod. This could set a precedent within the neighborhood, and findings of fact would need to be created to support the approval. FENDINGS The Planning Commission 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 these criteria. Finding. The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, and a two -car garage are constructed on the property. An alternate storage area could be constructed and comply with City Code. 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 this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the PUD -R zoning district. All properties within the Lake Susan Hills West development must maintain a 10 -foot side yard setback. When the subdivision was platted in 1987, the developer had to demonstrate that a 60, by 60' house pad could fit on each lot within the required setbacks. 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. The purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding. The alleged hardship of encroaching into the side yard setback is a self-created hardship. The desire for the proposed shed is based on the purchase of a motorcycle and indoor storage. An accessory building is allowed within the buildable area provided it meets the zoning requirements. The applicant has reasonable use of the property, a single-family house and a two -car garage, as well as another shed in the rear yard of the property. The proposed variance is for convenience, rather than necessity. Scherle Variance Request Planning Case 07-22 October 2, 2007 Page 6 of 6 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 variance may be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. The shed crowds the common property line to the North reducing the required separation between buildings. 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 may impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, due to the close proximity of the structure to the property line. RECOMIKENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "Me Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-22, for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the required I 0 -foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4 Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5dAddition, based on the findings of fact in the staff report. The Planning Commission fiirther directs that: 1. The applicant must move the shed and comply with die Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod." ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced copy of lot survey. 4. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. g:�pLm\2007 planning �\07-22 whefle varimceVlaniingo � reportAm CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND ACTION IN RE: Application of David and Julie Scherle for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance for the addition of a shed — Planning Case No. 07-22. On October 2, 2007, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the Application of David and Julie Scherle for 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance for the addition of a shed at 8541 Flamingo Drive, located in the Planned Unit Development Residential District (PUD -R) at Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance that was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I . The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development Residential (PUD -R). 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential — Low Density (Net Density Range 1.2 — 4u/Acre). 3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 4, Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5th Addition. 4. 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. The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property, a single-family home, and a two -car garage are constructed on the property. An alternate storage area could be constructed and comply with City Code. b. The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties in the PUDR zoning district. All properties within the Lake Susan Hills West development must maintain a 10 foot side yard setback. When the subdivision was platted in 1987, the developer had to demonstrate that a 60 by 60 house pad could fit on each lot with in the required setbacks. c. The purpose of the variation is not directly based on the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. d. The alleged hardship of encroaching into the side yard setback is a self-created hardship. The desire for the proposed shed is based on the purchase of a motorcycle and indoor storage. An accessory building is allowed within the buildable area provided it meets the zoning requirements. The applicant has reasonable use of the property, a single family house and a two car garage, as well as another shed in the rear yard of the property. The proposed variance is for convenience, rather than necessity c. The variance may be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Since the shed crowds the common property line to the North and reducing the required separation between buildings. f The proposed variation may impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, due to the close proximity of die structure to the property line. 5. The planning report #07-22 Variance dated October 2, 2007, prepared by Angie Auseth, et al, is incorporated herein. ACTION "The Planning Commission denies Planning Case 07-22, for a 7 -foot 3 -inch side yard setback variance from the required I 0 -foot side yard setback for the construction of a shed on Lot 4 Block 1, Lake Susan Hills West 5h Addition, based on the findings of fact in the staff report. The Planning Commission further directs that: 1. The applicant must move the shed and comply with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant must re -vegetate all removed hard surface areas with grass seed or sod." ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 2nd day of October, 2007. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION It "I gAplan\2007 plmning casesl,07-22 schffle varme"ndings of factAm PA Its Chairman MEMORANDUM TO: Angie Auseth, Planner FROM: Jerritt Mohn, Build ir� DATE: September 7, 20077 SUBJ: Review of variance requests for: Five (5) foot side yard setback. On property located at 8541 Flamingo Trail. Planning Case: 07-22 I have reviewed the above request for a variance and have no comment (as the floor area of this independent structure is less than 120 sq. ft. a building permit is not required; Ref MSBC 1300.0120). G/plwi/2007 pl�ing cases/07-22 Scherle variance(buildingofficialco�mts.dm CM OF CHMSEN Date: September 6,2007 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department By: Angie Auseth, Plarmer I Subject: SCHERLE VARIANCE: Request for an after -the -fact variance to a side yard setback to construct a garage addition on property zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R) located at 8541 Flamingo Drive. Applicant: David & Julie Scher1c. Planning Case: 07-22 Ile above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on August 30, 2007. The 60 -day review period ends October 30, 2007. In order for us 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 finure 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 recornmendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on October 2, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than September 21,2007. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. City Departments: a. City Engineer b. City Attorney c. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official f, Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 3. MN Dept. of Transportation 4. MN Dept. of Natural Resources 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 6. U.S. Fish & Wildlife 7. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services 8. Watershed District Engineer a. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek b. Lower Minnesota River c. Minnehaha Creek 9. Telephone Company (Qwest or SprintfUnited) 10. Electric Company (Xcel Energy or MN Valley) 11. Mediacom. 12. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco LOCATION MAP 8541 FLAMINGO DRIVE SCHERLE VARIANCE REQUEST PLANNING CASE 2007-22 Ir CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard — P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 — (952) 227-1100 j DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION PLEASE PRINT Planning Case No.0 -7 -04�, CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECSIVED AUG 3 0 2007 CttVIW.SSV4 NXII'Mo DF -7 g : Applicant Name and Addre s e.,r 1,e Owner Name and Address: — _-S'A r" J= C -11n n 11CA Contact: j�cLvicjl. Contact: Phone'.7-5a,-30i�-q&e Email: Fax: A�;'.r_om Phone: Fax: Email: NOTE: Consultation with City staff is required prior to submittal, including review of development plans Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Interim Use Permit (IUP) Non -conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development' Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review (SPR)* Subdivision* Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC) _X_ Variance (VAR) 7 -'0 - Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign — $200 (City to install and remove) X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" - $50 CUPISPRIVACNARIWAP/Metes & Bounds - $450 Minor SUB TOTAL FEE $ ('_-Z-3 An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the -applicant prior to the public hearing. *Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8%" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital copy in TIFF -Group 4 (*.tio format. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. N PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: q " is I& / 4-qffe //,!5 jje_6r]E � �'Aj. C_'krVer_ C -O""4, "i TOTALACREAGE: WETLANDS PRESENT: —YES 'x NO PRESENTZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: Ll //.1 4 6;,1, :5,±brc_k -�br -SAe-,J This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or dearly 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 spedfic ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. 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 allached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Ownees 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 " - 3 1) -07 of A !*!H!� �t� Date 0, 02 of Fee Ovfher Date WpLANJ[�Zevelopment Review Application.1DOC Rev. 12105 Written Statements that answer all six of the findings for granting a variance. A) That the literal enforcement of this Chapter would cause undue hardship. I'Lindue hardship?' means the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. With the purchase of our new motorcycle, we found we were not able to fit this in our garage along with our 2 cars. Putting a shed on the side of our garage would be the most logical place to house our motorcycle, making it easily accessible- Due to the pie shape of our property however, we would only be able to build this shed 4 V- feet away from the property line, thus, making it impossible to meet the std. fl. allowance. B) That the condition upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. This is a unique situation due to the shape of our property. C) That the purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of our property. See 'D' below for further explanation. D) That the alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Due to a back issue caused by the vibration of our previous smaller motorcycle; David has recently found it necessary to purchase a bigger motorcycle with minimal to no vibration. As a result, we are unable to fit this in our garage. We have concluded that our best option would be to add a shed next to our garage. E) That 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 of land is located. This shed would not be detrimental to public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. F) That the purposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, etc... The height of this shed is under the soffit of our garage and therefore will not impair light or air to adjacent property. We have discussed this shed with the Abels adjacent to our property and they have no objections. Written description of the variance request We would like a variance for a shed to be build 4 Vz ft away from our property line. I F,AS( 5-0 Ff srov- SAM Hou /7 /)-7 0 N1 f i Iv.9 -�e I t "-' I- R o 0 kon� ON Ce-fjt / STU, '� X) 0 tj 'X Dose Writ P. V;N.�f SJI#13 rl% e �u ILI w1i CAJ 4D I ot Fr o /\/ -t -L x Pool P(,t(zk fn e ,�qL EACK RO '? , , , �r,- -ts .c x"x �, 11 w h 1� Te- RoN up G� r -P-5 D 00 �— ; Y. "16 5 jC( jAJ ,� ,.-7 B,(i c 1<� -T�-, m ArojN<4 Bat� G- m Y-6) e- Doc r -S ff o �-O w tj - f 103 1 y / i CM OF mms Date: September 6,2007 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department By: Angie Auseth, Planner I Subject: SCHERLE VARIANCE: Request for an after -the -fact variance to a side yard setback to construct a garage addition on property zoned Planned Unit Development -Residential (PUD -R) located at 8541 Flamingo Drive. Applicant: David & Julie Scherle. Planning Case: 07-22 The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on August 30,2007. The 60 -day review period ends October 30,2007. In order for us 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 casements 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 cffect from the agency concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the Planning Coninrission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on October 2, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than September 21, 2007. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. City Departments: a. City Engineer b. City Attorney c. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official f. Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 3. MN Dept. of Transportation 4. MN Dept. of Natural Resources 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 6. U.S. Fish & Wildlife 7. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services 8. Watershed District Engineer a. Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek b. Lower Minnesota River c. Minnehaha Creek 9. Telephone Company (Qwest or Sprint/United) 10. Electric Company (Xcet Energy or MN Valley) It. Mediacom 12. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco 8541 FLAMINGO DRIVE SCHERLE VARIANCE REQUEST PLANNING CASE 2007-22 Planning Case No.0 -7 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard — P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, IVIN 55317 — (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION nd Addr s: Owner Name and Address: "I've- K-k%er1�e— I _-'s A rn r— Phone'.Tsa-3&��-'/�& Fax: Email: j :5c.Ae_r/-P_ C,-, A �2 . ccm CiTY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED AUG 3 0 2007 [,�W �51- �rlj z - Contact: Phone: Fax: Email: NOTE: Consultation with City staff is required prior to submittal, including review of development plans Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Interim Use Permit (IUP) Non -conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development* Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review (SPR)* Subdivision* Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (VAC) _X_ Variance (VAR) Z 0'0 - Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP) Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign - $200 (City to install and remove) X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost" - $50 CUPISPR/VACNAR/WAP/Metes & Bounds - $450 Minor SUB TOTAL FEE $ 7- S -D - (,-303 An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant prior to the public hearing. *Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8%" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a digital cop in TIFF -Group 4 (*.tif) format. "Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. SCANNED PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: /-'1 4- Ll Lqffe— 6C,!SQ1j L;//,5 C—,Lrver- H/V TOTALACREAGE: WETLANDS PRESENT: —YES 'x NO PRESENT ZONING: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: Ll "4A 4 61dz :Se±j'eLC/< �br -SAed 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 spec'.fic ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. 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 Owners 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 r k I d I -c" of of GApLAN\foms\Deve1opment Review Applicafion.DOC 3 ') -0 7 49 - L '?— -30-07 Date 3 c,7 -6 C:7 Date Rev. 12/05 SCANNED Written Statements that answer all six of the findings for granting a variance. A) That the literal enforcement of this Chapter would cause undue hardship. "Undue hardship" means the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. With the purchase of our new motorcycle, we found we were not able to fit this in our garage along with our 2 cars. Putting a shed on the side of our garage would be the most logical place to house our motorcycle, making it easily accessible. Due to the pie shape of our property however, we would only be able to build this shed 4 1/2feet away from the property line, thus, making it impossible to meet the std. ft. allowance. B) That the condition upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. This is a unique situation due to the shape of our property. C) That the purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of our property. See 'D' below for further explanation. D) That the alleged difficulty or hardship is riot a self-created hardship. Due to a back issue caused by the vibration of our previous smaller motorcycle; David has recently found it necessary to purchase a bigger motorcycle with minimal to no vibration. As a result, we are unable to fit this in our garage. We have concluded that our best option would be to add a shed next to our garage. E) That 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 of land is located. This shed would not be detrimental to public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. F) That the purposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, etc... The height of this shed is under the soffit of our garage and therefore will not impair light or air to adjacent property. We have discussed this shed with the Abels adjacent to our property and they have no objections. SCANNED Written description of the variance request We would like a variance for a shed to be build 4 1/2ft away from our property line. SCANNED /,i e S' H o u s e/ -J, 10 1 'y V/ OL A 0 (z) f i A/,� -�e I It I i F,,S6(A Atl� S7,,Ff�t Sro Vj H C) L) STU�y eoTe Xd. US rk � If 6 ) c- --4Lk ��'e 15 r f" /, (, " , , (f ae./te r �L " - - - - - - AJ j! d'O' IS jo / cot st, ci e- W/� I I i 6e il SCANNED ---o 0 L rol wa �j -4- Z� v L ME L Iz -�r I I 'bi C�6 L WO LN Fr oN frI, t q L ip-- AC VX R 0 I -L Xt C�L 12- wh 11 Te RoN up 00 5 -Some- W6 // 163 O,f 5"de 9 /4 C 1<, .-T�-(, (" A rOJN"4 B (3 � � CI- Y-6) e- Doc c --s �),qt- 0 �-O w tj W � J e- R,J( UP 103 &A SCHERLE VARIANCE - PLANNING CASE 07-22 $200 Variance $50 Escrow for Filing Fees $250 Julie Scherle Check 6303 2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, MN 55120 PIONEER LAND SURVEYORS - OVIL ENGINEERS (612) 681 -1914 -Fox 681-9488_ LAND PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS engineering 625 Highway 10 Northeast Blaine. MN 55434 (612) 783 -1800 -Fox 783-1883 Certificate of Survey for: Joseph M. Miller Construction Co. House Address: .--whanhassen, MN Model Name: PrIncion 3 TV ji'll! r (z 91031�' Cis %+,,v I 6' 7 - Ictf <1\ a cp 0 X 38 10 X lip -0 N lip 151k lit Byl CIO DEPTi DATE. 0 DATE 3-26' :3 - PROPOSED HOUSE ELEVATION 900.0 Denotes Existing Elevation 4th Level Elevation: 932.25 -(g�) Denotes Proposed Elevation 3rd Level Elevatlon:-§-37A� Denotes Drainage & Utility Easement Denotes Drainage Flow Direction Top of Block Elevation: 940.36 —c�— Denotes Monument Garage Slab Elevation: 940.03 E3 Denotes Offset Hub Bearings shown are assumed LOT 4 BLOCK 1 LAKE SUSAN HILLS WEST CARVER COUNTY. MINNESOTA 5TH ADDITION I hereby certify that this survey, plan or reiiott was prepared by me or under my dirlICTIMPUM111M., Will 1101 1 a... tIu1V P"T"Md Land Surveyor under the tam of the Slate of Minnesota. Dated this Z-0111cleyof A,D. 19 '3Z . inch - REG, NO, 14091 SCANNED Non -Scannable Item Item Folder Num.b—or Scherle, David & Julie so 8541 Flamin o Drive - PID 25-401 40 Folder Name MM Variance to Ke Yard Setback Job Number 23 , ZLq Box Number .40morext —D jE;L r"5 i�) 1cc f, L I h & r) 0 CDwR F700m nr -- 1; 1 -- I