78-18 VAR pt 1CITY OF ;e 1e�
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O BOX 1476CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel
DATE: September 25, 1978
SUBJ: Subdivision Request and Sketch Plan Review
APPLICANT: Bruce Ross
PLANNING CASE: P-578
Planner's Comments
As shown in the attached planning commission minutes, the planning
commission had tabled further discussion of this item so that Mr. Ross
could have the opportunity to be present to answer any questions the
planning commission might have or to personally present his petition.
The attached correspondence of September 5, 1978, and September 12,
1978, have established this scheduled appearance before the Planning
Commission. For purposes of review, my planning report of August 22,
1978, a copy of which has been attached, continues the position of this
office to the subject request.
2402 Esther Court
Silver Spring, Md 20910
September 12, 1978
Bob Waibel
Assistant City Planner
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Dear Mr. Waibel:
Thank you for your letter of September 5th, with
its enclosures. I would like to continue the process of
requesting a zoning varience, as described in my application
of August 7th.
I can arrange to attend the Planning Commission
meeting on September 27th, to respond to discussion of the
variance request. I would prefer that it be scheduled
relatively late on the adgenda, as I would not arrive at
the Twin Cities airport until about 7:30 p.m.
I understand, from the planning report and from
the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of August 23rd,
that I need to be more specific regarding what ordinance I am
requesting a variance to.
From the planning report, I infer that the. appropriate
course is for me to request a variance to Ordinance 45, section
13, Le. to request permission to divide the property by metes
and bounds into two parcels so that a second residence could
be constructed for the family without being in.conflict with
Ordinance 47, Section 6.04, subsection 7.
My request is based on the allowance, provided for in
sections 13.02 and 16.01 of Ordinace 45, for a variance in a
case where the restrictions of the ordinace create an un-
necessary hardship to.the enjoyment of a substantial property
right. I understand that so long as the proposed conveyance
would not adversely affect the Comprehensive Village Plan or
the spirit and intent of Ordinance 45, then the City Council
may grant a variance.
I note from the planning report and from the minutes
that the issue of whether conveyance of the parcel by metes
and bounds, for the reasons described in my letter of August 7th,
would adversely affect the Village Plan or the spirit and intent
of Ordinance 45 has not yet been discussed. Neither, apparently,
has the issue of whether it is a "substantial property right"
for a 72 year -old widow to use five acres of her 14.5 acre home-
stead to avail herself.of the care and security that can be
provided by having her son and his family in a nearby residence.
I expect that these would be the substantial issues for discussion
at the meeting on September 27th.
Sincerely yours,
Bruce A. Ross
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE*P.O. BOX 1476CHANHASSEN, MINN ESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: August 22, 1978
TO: Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: Subdivision Request, Sketch Plan Review
APPLICANT: Bruce.Ross
PLANNING CASE: P-578
Ppt-i t-i nn
Mr. Ross is requesting to subdivide approximately 14.5 acres in the
unsewered area into two residential sites.
Background
1. Community Location: As shown in enclosure 1, the subject property
is located on the east side of MTH 41 approximately 4,500 south of the
intersection of MTH 7 and 41.
2. Existing Zoning: The subject property and it's environs are
presented zoned R-JA.agricultural residence district.
3. Utilities: The subject property presently is not served by sanitary
sewer or municipal water. It is anticipated that it will be a considerable
number of years before this area is serviced with said utilities.
Planner's Comments
1. As shown in enclosure 2, Mr. Ross is requesting to build a second
residence on the subject property. He does not wish to divide the property
but if he is required to do so he would prefer to divide it by metes
and bounds into one 9.5 acre parcel and another 5 acre parcel. (Reference
attached plan).
2. Mr. Ross' intentions to simply establish a second residence
appurtenant:to the first residence comes within the guidelines of
ordinance 47 whereby in an R-lA zone secondary living quarters are
allowed only for persons employed on the premises of the permitted
agricultural use. It is the opinion of this office that this particular
Planning Commissic -2- Augus t. 22, 1978
approach would be in conflict of the spirit and intent of the city
ordinances.
In order to carry out his intentions of establishing a secondary
residence on the subject property, Mr. Ross must fulfill the requirements
of Section 2.02 of Ordinance 45 whereby residential building permits
in areas not presently served by Village sanitary sewer shall be
limited to one single family residential permit on each 22 acre tract.
The situation of the subject property as such first requires that the
22 acre tract be created through some method of conveyence. The only
permissable method of subdividing the subject property is in accordance
with Ordinance 33B Section 13.01, Subsection 4, whereby land may be
conveyed by metes and bounds if it is a single parcel of land not less
than 5 acres and having a width of less than 300 feet and it's
conveyence does not result in the division of a parcel into two or
more lots or parcels, any one of which is less than 5 acres in area
or 300 feet in width. If a particular parcel meets the test of this
particular clause, then it must be tested against the geometry cited
in section 2.02 of Ordinance 45 for the ability to qualify for a
building permit. In reviewing the plans submitted by the applicant,
it is apparent that the subject property cannot be physically divided
into parcels of 300 feet in width as required by Ordinance 33-B.
It is my interpretation that this necessarily places the applicant
in the position whereby he must either receive a variance to section
6.04 subsection 7 of Ordinance 47 whereby living quarters for persons
employed on the premises of a permitted use (farm related) is permitted
to be constructed or to seek a variance to Section 2.01 of Ordinance
45 whereby the applicant is permitted to subdivide the property through
the means of a plat. Both of these two methods are to be based solely
upon the interpretation of the content of the attached letter from
Mr. Bruce Ross to the Zoning Administrator dated August 7, 1978, or
any other findings of need based upon hardships as presented by the
applicant.
3. After reviewing the subject property, it appears that it does not
qualify as an agricultural homestead in that it does not derive its income
from the products produced on the premises. In seeking a conditional
use permit or a variance to the R-lA requirements of zoning ordinance
47, the applicant must have proof or present plans that demonstrate
that both households will derive their subsistence from the products
produced on the land.
4. In reviewing the letter from Mr. Ross of August 7, 1978, I am
hardpressed to find that the reasons set forth are sufficient to
allow or necessitate the construction of a second residence on a site
in the unsewered area.
5. The Planning Commission at this time should advise the applicant
that he has every right to forward his request, however, the Planning
Commission should also at this time advise the applicant of their
sentiments towards the subject property so as not to inadvertently
encourage the applicant to expend any unnecessary time or expense in
pursuit of the request.
Planning Commissic -3- August 22, 1978
Planner's Recommendation
It is the belief of this office, that the most suitable method of
approaching this particular request, is to go through the variance
process to section 2.01 of Ordinance 45. As previously mentioned,
the applicant has every right to pursue his request, however, it is
also the belief of this office that the materials submitted to date,
are insufficient to allow for a second residence on the subject property
or the subdivision of the subject property for the second residence.
L ��
70
-24-
VARIANCE PETITION CASE NO. VAR.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST _
Date of Application August 7, 19-78.
Fee Paid Date
Received by
Daytime Phone #
Applicant: .
Name: Rose Bruce _ A.
Last First Initial
Address: 2402 Esther Court Silver S rin, Md _ 2.010'
Number and Street City State Zip Code
Owner
Name: F, Maxine Ross, Route 5, Box 106, Excelsior, Minn 55331
Number and Street City State Zip Code
Address of Property in Question;
Legal description of property in question:
The South Sixteen (16) acres of the Southeast One Fourth -of
of the Southeast One Fourth (SE4 of SE4) of Section Four (41
Township One Hundred Sixteen (116), Range Twenty Three (23)',.Except'
that part taken by the State of Minnesota for Highway,.and except, ;._.
the part West of the highway deeded to Dennis R. &. B. Jacobson:
Reason .for Request:
ee attached letter.
Present zoning of property: RlA
Present use of property-- Residential '<1r-+ -_'?ricultural
40
The following documents shall be attached to this application:
Date Received Initial
1. Dimensioned Sketch Plan
2. Abstractors Certificate
(Names and addresses of
property owners within
350 feet of subject
property).
3. Signatures
I hereby.declare that all statements made in this application and on
the attached documents are true and that I shall reimburse the City
of Chanhassen for all City expenses incurred in processing this
application.
Signature of Applicant
gnature of Owner �y
August 7, 1978
Date
Received by Title Date
(Following to be completed by Zoning Administrator or City Official).
CHRONOLOGY.
DATE
BY
Report Written
Copies for Comments to: Mgr (:),
Treas. ( ), Atty. ( ), Engr. (.},
Bldg. ( )
Public Hearing'Ordered
Adjacent property owners notified
Public Hearing by Board of
Adjustments and Appeals
Public Hearing
Application on Council Agenda
Council Postponed to
Council Action
Board
Of
,', .
Staff
usbT
ent
,mat is the V4i ?shi o?
c
Yes
No
(1) Will the particular physical Yes No
surroundings, shape or topo-
graphical conditions of the
sp,:cific parcel of lard
involved, cause a particular
hardship to the owner, as
distinguished from.a mere
inconvenience, if the strict
letter of the regulations
were to be carried out?
(2)
Are the conditions upon which
Yes
No
Yes
No
a potit.ion for a variat.ion is
basud uniquE3 to the parcel of
land for w}li(h the variance
is sought and not appl.ic:able,
generally, to other property
within the saire zoni "j
classification?
(3)
Is the alleged difficulty or
Yes
No
Yes
No
hardship caused by this ord-
nance and not by any persons
.presently having an interest
in the parcel of land?
(4)
Will the granting of the
Yes
No
Yes
No
variance be detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious
to other land or improvements
in the neighborhood in which
the parcel is located?
(5)
Will the proposed variation
Yes
No
Yes
No
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 en-
danger the public safety
or substantially diminish or
impair property values within
the neighborhood?
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS ANDAPPEALSRECOMMENDATION (Variance Request)
On this day of 19 , this Variance
Request was recommended for (approval) , (disapproval) subject to' the
following conditions:
Chairman, Board of Adjustments & Appeal
Action by City - Variance Request
On this day of 19 , the Chanhassen City
Council, Carver and Hennepin Counties, Minnesota (approved), (disapproved;
this Variance Request subject to the following conditions:
By order of the Chanhassen
City Council
Mayor
Attest:
City Administrator
PLANNING REQUEST
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO: Manager ( )
Engineer ( )
Treasurer ( )
Attorney ( )
Building ( )
FROM: Planning Department
SUBJ: Response Requested on Attached Variance Request
CONSIDERATION:
Comments from your department.concerning the attached are requested
by
DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS:
0
Nr Valley Abstract & Title Seruice, Inc.
P.O. Box 160 105 West Third
CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318
Phone: 448-6608
August 3, 1978
The following are a list of landowners within 350 feet
of the following described property owned by F. Maxine
loss:
The South 16 Acres of the Southeast
Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (SE14
of SE-Q of Section 4 Township 116 Range
23, except that part taken by the State
of Minnesota for Highway and except that
part deeded to Dennis R. & B. Jacobson.
Ches-Mar Realty Co.
1700 West 78th. St.
Minneapolis, Minn. 55423
John & Frances Dassett
8295 Ericson Drive
Williamsville, New York
Merle D. & Jane Volk
Rte. 5 Box 110
Excelsior, Minn. 55331
R.J. & E.M. Lyman
2608 lst National Bank Building
Minneapolis, Minn 55402
Chas. D. & E.J. Adkins
Rte. 2 Box 290
Rockford, Minn. 55373
Dennis R. & B. Jacobso:
Rte. 5
Excelsior, Minn. 55331
Given under my hand this 3rd day of August, 1978
William J. Sch ider
Manager
1
Bruce A. Ro::s
c/o Maxine Ross
Route 5, Box. 106
Excelsior, Minnesota 55331
August 7, 1978
Zoning Administrator,
Board of Adjustments and Appeals,
and City Council
City of Chanhassen
Chanhassen, Minnesota.
Dear Sirs:
I am requesting a variance from the zoning ordinance, to
build a, second residence on n,y motY«=r',> lz .5 acre horrtestE=ad
located on the east side of Highway #41 in Chanhassen. She
and I would prefer not to divide the property, but if the
government specifies that it must be divided, then we would
make a mets-and-bounds division as indicated on the attached
sketch, which would result in one piece of 9.5 acres and another
of 5 acres.
The reason for building a second residence is so that I,
with my wife and two children, may live on the family property
to care for my mother during her old. age. She has lived in her
present home since 1954, and has lived in the area that is now
Cher_liessen City for all of her 72 years, having been born less
than one mile from the present homestead. She has lived here
alone since my father died in 1974. She finds that mainteria.nce
of the property to the standards kept by my father is beyond her
physical and fincial means, and the deteoriation of. the land
distresses her -- the unmown hayfields are being invaded by weeds,
the 4 &.cres of 28 year -old pines badly need grading and thinning,
the apple orchard needs pruning, mowing and fertilizing, the little -
used barn begins to have rodent problems, putting up produce from
the vegetable garden becomes an overwhelming task, etc. Yeanwhile,
we are concerned for herphysical security, both from the possibility
of intruders on the isolated site, and from the rigors of winter
at the top of a steeply graded driveway.
0f course cnc_ solution is for° her to sell the land and
move to a smaller house in the urban area for present, and then
to become gradually more dependant on government services for
care and security. However, that is not the solution we prefer,
and is certainly not what my father intended when he established
the 14.5 acre homestead. He intended, end we prefer, that the
family stay together and support its own members, that his grand-
children enjoy the advantages of daily interaction with a grand-
parent and of a rural environment during their value -forming
years, -ha..t ! my t.mathe.v, . er j oy--are by .her- children during her years
of dependancy, and that she not be disrupted by having to move
fror.-, her lifetime home.
We trust that the governmoriNt of Chanhassen concurs in
these values and will allow us to build. the second residence.
I am currently residing in Maryland, working in Washington,
D.C. I intend to move to Chanhassen as soon as the matter of
residence is settled. Pleanwhile, please address correszcndal-ice
to me in care of my mother, so that she may review the items
before forwarding them to me.
Thank you.
Sincerly yours,
Bruce A. Ross