26-02 signed PC findings of factCITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES. MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
IN RII:
Application of property owner Gregg Geiger for front setback variance on a property zoned
Single Family Residential District (RSF) - Plaming Case 2026-02.
On March 3'd, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and
mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following:
l. The property is currently zoned Single Family Residential Drstnct (RSF) and located rvithin
the Shoreland Management Overlay District.
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density
3. The property legal description as described in Exhibit A.
4. Variance Findinss - Sectron 20-58 of the City Code provides the following critena for the
ganting of a variance:
Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent ofthis Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan.
Finding: The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intenl of the t:hapter,
as well as the comprehensive plan.
b. When there are practical diftlcultres in complying with the zonrng ordinance. "Practical
difficulties" as used in connection rvith the granting ofa 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 aooess to drrect sunlight
fbr solar energy systems.
Finding: The requested variance has practical difficulty in complying with the zoning
ordinoncc due to the uniquc charadcristics and location ofthe lot on a peninsula. The
properq) owner is proposing to keep all structures the same, thc variant:e is b facilitate a
lot line adjustment, which is a reasonable request lo resolve a property line dispute.
a
FINDINGS OF FACT
C That the purpose ofthe variation is not based upon economic considerations alone
Finding: Thc variation is not based on eutnomic considerations alone.
d. The plight ofthe landowner is due to circumstances untque to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The plight of the landowner is due to circumstance to the property created by
lhe uniquc location of the lot, not created by the property owner.
The vanance, ifgranted, wrll not alter the essential character of the localityc
Finding: Thc variance, if granted, would nol alter the essential character of the locality-
as the applicant is not proposing to construcl or renovate a slructure.
1'. 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 rutl an earth-sheltered construction and therefore not
applicable.
The planning report #2026-02 dated February 25,2025. prepared by Rachel Arsenault
is incorporated herein.
The Planning Commission approves the requested variance for a front yard setback subject to the
conditions of the staffreport.
ADOPTED by the Chan}assen Planning Commission this 3'd day of March 2026
CHANIIASS N PLANNING COMMISSION
BY
Its Cliairman
5
DECISION
Exhibit A
THE WEST 225 FEET OF LOT I, BLOCK 4, RID CEDAR POINT ADDITION, LAKE
MINNEWASHTA, EXCEPT THE WEST 25 FEET THEREOF, CARVER COIJNTY,
MINNESOTA.