Loading...
Staff Report PH (952) 227 -1100 • ChanhassenMN.gov 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD • PO BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN • MINNESOTA • 55317 Application: Variance (Planning Case #2026-09) Staff Report Date: June 30, 2026 Drafted By: Rachel Arsenault, Planner II Rachel Jeske, Planner II Gwendolyn Kelley, Community Planning Intern Planning Commission Review Date: July 7, 2026 60-Day Action Deadline: August 4, 2026 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting a variance to the front setback requirements to allow for the installation of a privacy fence at 7024 Dakota Ave. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city’s discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether the proposed project meets the standards in the zoning ordinance for a variance. The city has a moderate LOCATION: 7024 Dakota Ave. PID: 25-2300130 OWNER: APPLICANT: Kory Yamada Next Day Fences PRESENT ZONING: Single-Family Residential (RSF) 2040 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density ACREAGE: 0.47 PROPOSED MOTION: “The Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, approves the requested front yard setback variance for a fence at the property located at 7024 Dakota Avenue.” level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20 – Article 20-II – Division 20-II-3 Variances Chapter 20 – Article 20-XII RSF Single-Family Residential District Chapter 20 – Article 20 XXIII – Division 20-XXIII-5 Fences and Walls PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a variance from the required front yard setback to install a privacy fence at 7024 Dakota Ave. BACKGROUND/ EXISTING CONDITIONS This property is located in the Colonial Grove at Lotus Lake neighborhood, platted in 1956. The home was constructed in 1967 according to Carver County property data. Because its driveway extends from Dakota Avenue, the property along Dakota Avenue is considered the front yard by municipal code, despite the front door, or main entrance, being located along Dakota Circle. Due to the steep grade on the west side of the property, the driveway was placed off the side of the house on Dakota Avenue to comply with city standards for driveway slope. Consequently, the single-family home itself on the property is considered lawful nonconforming to the front setback and is located an estimated 25 feet and 4 inches from the front property line at its closest point. The standard Residential Single Family (RSF) zoning district front yard setback is 30 feet. ZONING OVERVIEW The subject property is a corner lot at the intersection of Dakota Avenue and Dakota Circle. City Code Section 20-1023 states that for fences installed on corner or double fronted lots, “the front yard shall be determined by the location of the property's access by a driveway to the public street.” Fence heights and locations are regulated based on the proposed fence material. City Code Section 20-1023 states that “Fences in the required front yard setback area that are opaque shall not exceed three feet in height.” The applicant is proposing a 6-foot cedar privacy fence to be installed 20 feet behind the front lot line along Dakota Ave. The installation of the cedar privacy fence would encroach 10 feet into the 30-foot front yard setback area required for opaque fence construction. The proposed fence location shows a reasonable use of the property, as it encloses the area that acts as the rear yard for the property. The fence is not proposed to obstruct sight lines within the public right of way. PROPOSED FENCE ANALYSIS Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the granting of a variance: a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding: The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the chapter, as well as the comprehensive plan. b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties" as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Finding: The requested variance has practical difficulty in complying with the zoning ordinance due to the slope of the property and the resulting layout of the home and the driveway on the property. The property owner is proposing a reasonable use of the property that requires a variance for fence installation. c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone. Finding: The variation is not based on economic considerations alone. d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Finding: The plight of the landowner is due to circumstance to the property created by the slope on the property, and the subsequent location of the driveway and the home on the property built in 1967, not created by the property owner. e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Finding: The variance, if granted, would not alter the essential character of the locality as the front-yard is only considered such due to the unique location of the driveway and otherwise complies with municipal code. f. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter. Finding: The proposed is not an earth-sheltered construction and therefore not applicable. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Chanhassen Planning Commission approve the requested front-yard setback variance to install a privacy fence as demonstrated in the plan set.