HomeMy WebLinkAboutSchiller VarianceJune 22, 2011 Item No.
Frank Dempsey, Asso
JUNE 27, 2011 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SCHILLER VARIANCE
PROPOSED ACTION
Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Move to approve the Anthony and Anne
Schiller variance and adopt the findings of fact as presented.
Adoption of this motion will allow the construction of a deck onto the rear of an existing single
family home located at 21077 Istria Path.
OVERVIEW
The Schillers purchased a spec home constructed by D.R. Horton in 2006 with a sliding glass door and
ledger for a future deck. They are proposing to construct an elevated deck that does not meet the 30
foot setback from the rear property line due to the shallow depth of the lot. The proposed deck is 16
feet deep by 20 feet wide and will be set back 20 feet from the rear property line. The usable depth
of the deck is only 13 feet due to the bay window /door which provides access to the deck. The
nearest house or deck to the Schiller's proposed deck is 81 feet. A three foot wide deck would be
allowed without the variance. Research of other properties in the neighborhood indicates that the
Schiller property is the only property in the Chadwick Farm neighborhood that cannot build a deck
without a variance.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing at their June 16, 2011 regular meeting and
recommended approval of the variance. There was no public comment but there was a letter and
three emails that were sent by neighbors of the Schillers in support of the variance request.
PRIMARY ISSUES To CONSIDER
Does the variance request meet the new state statute criteria? On May 6, 2011 new State of
Minnesota legislation concerning variance criteria became law and the City Attorney recommends we
use the new State variance criteria until our Zoning Ordinance is amended to incorporate the criteria.
The new criteria are listed in the June 10, 2011 planning report. Staff and the majority of the
Planning Commission agree that the proposed variance meets the new criteria.
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
0 Variance form
0 Findings of fact
0 June 16, 2011 draft Planning Commission meeting minutes
0 Two neighbor emails in support of the variance
0 June 1 ' 11 planning report
Pla - er
Financial Impact: $ None Budgeted: Y/N Source:
Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): Zoning Ordinance,
Notes:
(Reserved for Dakota County Recording Information)
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
VARIANCE
1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of
Lakeville grants a variance to Anthony and Ann Schiller to allow a 20 foot rear yard
setback for the construction of deck onto an existing house located at 21077 Istria
Path.
2. Property. The variance is for the following described property in the City of
Lakeville, Dakota County, Minnesota:
Lot 8, Block 3, CHADWICK FARM SECOND ADDITION
3. Conditions. The variance is issued subject to the following conditions:
a) The deck shall be constructed in accordance with the site plan approved by
the City Council.
b) The deck or any appurtenance of the deck shall be set back no closer than
20 feet from the rear property line.
4. Lapse. If within one year from the issuance of this permit the variance has not been
completed or the use commenced, this permit shall lapse.
1
DRAFTED BY:
City of Lakeville
20195 Holyoke Avenue
Lakeville, MN 55044
2
Date:
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
BY:
Mark Bellows, Mayor
BY:
Charlene Friedges, City Clerk
The following instrument was acknowledged before me this 27 day of June,
2011 by Mark Bellows, Mayor and by Charlene Friedges, City Clerk of the City of
Lakeville, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
SCHILLER VARIANCE
On June 16, 2011, the Lakeville Planning Commission met at it's regularly scheduled meeting to
consider the application of Anthony and Anne Schiller for a variance to allow a rear yard setback
less than 30 feet for the construction of deck onto an existing house located at 21077 Istria
Path. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded
by published and mailed notice. The applicant was present and the Planning Commission heard
testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak. The City Council hereby adopts the
following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is zoned RS -3, Single Family Residential District.
2. The property is located in Planning District No. 6 and is classified as Low Density
Residential in the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The legal description of the property is:
Lot 8, Block 3, CHADWICK FARM SECOND, Dakota County, Minnesota.
4. State of Minnesota Statute concerning variance criteria was amended and became law
effective May 6, 2011. State Statute requires that cities shall not approve any variance
request unless they find that certain criteria have been met. The criteria and our
findings regarding them are:
a) That the variance would be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The proposed deck variance will be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan
which guides the Chadwick Farm neighborhood for low density residential uses.
b) That the variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and
intent of this Title.
The proposed deck variance will be consistent with the 2003 Zoning Ordinance
amendment that increased the setback requirement for elevated decks to provide
greater separation between elevated decks and homes on adjoining Tots. The
Schiller's proposed deck will be set back more than 80 feet from the nearest home or
deck on an adjoining lot.
c) That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the
property not created by the landowner.
The shallow depth of the Schiller's lot (110 feet) is unique in the Chadwick Farm
neighborhood. Single family lots in Chadwick Farm are typically 130 feet or greater
in depth.
d) That the purpose of the variance is not exclusively economic
considerations.
The proposed deck variance is not due exclusively to economic considerations.
e) That the granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of
the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located.
The Schiller's proposed deck will be in keeping with the character of the Chadwick
Farm neighborhood.
f) That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate
the practical difficulty.
The proposed deck design takes into account the existing bay access on the back of
the house to allow adequate use of the deck with a reasonable encroachment into
the rear yard setback.
g) Variances may not be approved for any use that is not allowed under this
section for property in the zone where the affected person's land is
located.
Decks are a permitted use in the RS -3, Single Family Residential District.
5. The planning report dated June 10, 2011 and prepared by Associate Planner, Frank
Dempsey is incorporated herein.
DATED: June 27, 2011
2
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
BY:
Mark Bellows, Mayor
BY:
Charlene Friedges, City Clerk
e •
comply with Zoning • r. '• . - _ - : uirements.
Ayes: Lillehei, Davis, Maguire, Grenz, Drotning, Boerschel.
ITEM 6. ANTHONY AND ANN SCHILLER
Chair Davis opened the hearing to the public for comment.
There were no comments from the audience.
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 2011
Page 3
hed to the neighbor's accessory building shall be removed to
Chair Davis opened the public hearing to consider the application of Anthony and
Ann Schiller for a variance to allow a reduced rear yard building setback for the
construction of a deck onto an existing house, located at 21077 Istria Path. The
Recording Secretary attested that the legal notice had been duly published in
accordance with State Statutes and City Code.
Anthony Schiller presented an overview of their project. Mr. Schiller stated that his
house was a spec house and they were not aware of the 30 foot setback requirement
until they were denied a building permit for the deck. They assumed that because
the house was constructed with sliding glass doors and a ledger for a future deck,
that they would be able to construct a deck onto the back of the house.
Planning Director Daryl Morey presented the planning report. Mr. Morey stated
that staff has reviewed this request at length to see if there were other options to
allow the construction of a deck onto the rear of the house without the need for a
variance. He indicated that staff, at the recommendation of the City Attorney, is
utilizing the new state legislation concerning variances that was passed last month
and the amendment that will be incorporated into our Zoning Ordinance shortly in
their review of this variance request. Mr. Morey stated that the configuration of the
adjoining lots and the shallow depth of the Schiller's lot were two factors that staff
examined when reviewing this request.
Mr. Morey stated that should the Planning Commission recommend approval of
the variance, Planning Department staff recommends approval subject to the 2
stipulations listed in the June 10, 2011 planning report, and adoption of the
Findings of Fact dated June 16, 2011.
11.34 Motion was made and seconded to close the public hearing at 6:20 p.m.
Ayes: Davis, Maguire, Grenz, Drotning, Boerschel, Lillehei.
Nays: 0
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 2011
Page 4
Chair Davis asked for comments from the Planning Commission. Discussion points
were:
• Commissioner Grenz asked what the front yard setback is for this house.
Mr. Morey indicated that it is 30 feet and that the house was constructed at
the 30 foot setback which is consistent with the other homes in the
neighborhood.
• Commissioner Grenz feels that the builder created this problem and the
owner of the house should have known what the setback requirement is.
• Mr. Morey stated he spoke with the City Attorney the hardship in
this case. The City Attorney gave as an example of a self created hardship a
property owner that had a larger lot but 'Subdivided off a portion of the lot
for sale to a neighbor and then requested a variance for a deck that could not
meet the setback requirement to the new (reduced) property line. Mr. Morey
stated that the applicant for the variance: is the Schillers, not the
homebuilder. The Schillers bought this spec home with the deck doors and a
deck ledger and reasonably assumed that a' deck would be allowed in the
future.
• Commissioner Grenz stated that the builder should have known better. The
builder created this situation:' He cannot reconcile this with respect to
Variance Review Ci iteria C listed in the rune : 1 2011 planning report. Mr.
Morey asked Commissioner Grenz to consider the situation of a house
constructed 70 years ago : with subsequent owners. Should the current owner
be responsible for how, the house was built 70 years ago?
• Commissioner Drotning stated that this situation is why he is such a strong
supporter of the survey requirement. He indicated that with the
new variance criteria, this request is considered a reasonable use. Mr.
;: :Schiller did not create this problem.
• - Commissioner Drotning felt that if the City was never going to grant a
variance, we should take it out of the Zoning Ordinance. He felt that this is a
reasonable use.
• Chair Davis agreed He commented that we approve perhaps one variance a
year. If the deck setback issue was caught with the building permit for the
new house, the Schilling's would not have to be here today. Chair Davis
agreed that we should not penalize this applicant for what the builder did.
• Commissioner Borschel asked that when this deck deteriorates, will the
owners have to come back to ask for another variance. Mr. Morey stated that
they would not as long as the deck was reconstructed not closer than 20 feet
from the rear property line.
• Commissioner Lillehei commented that the Zoning Ordinance is available
for any perspective home buyer to review therefore the applicant should
have been aware of the deck setback requirement.
Respectfully submitted,
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 2011
Page 5
• Commissioners Maguire and Borschel felt there would be a reasonable
assumption that a deck could be built onto this home and that the hardship
was not created by the current landowner.
• Mr. Morey commented that because this was a spec house, if the Schiller's
had walked away from it, another perspective buyer would likely have come
forward with a variance because of the assumption that a deck could have
been built. He indicated that a variance application would likely have come
forward eventually by either a potential homebuyer or the homebuilder.
• Commissioner Lillehei mentioned that the deck setback should have been
included in the truth in housing documents.
• Commissioner Drotning felt that particularly . in a newer subdivision, buyers
assume all bases have been covered. He .felt that it would be an unrealistic
expectation for the buyer to know the setback requirement for a deck. He
stated that in this particular instance we missed one with die design of the
lots in this subdivision and the shallow depth of this particular lot, which is
rare. The variance will correct this mistake. -,
• Commissioner Grenz agreed that the current homeowner had nothing to do
with this hardship. He felt that landowner that built the house created
the hardship. The hardship criteria just states landowner, not current
landowner. If it stated current landowner he could support the variance
request.
11.35 Motion was made: and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the
Schiller variance to' allow a reduced rear yard building setback for the construction
of a deck onto an 'existing house, located at 21077 Istria Path, subject to the
following .:2 stipulations; arid adoption of the Findings of Fact dated June 16, 2011:
The deck shall be constructed in accordance with the site plan approved by
the City Council:;..,
2. Thee setback of the deck or any appurtenance of the deck shall be set back no
closer 'than 20 feet from the rear property line.
Ayes: Maguire, Grenz, Drotning, Boerschel, Lillehei, Davis.
Nays: Grenz. Commissioner Grenz felt that this request does not meet Variance
Review Criteria C listed in the June 10, 2011 planning report.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:41 p.m.
Dempsey, Frank
From: Anthony Schiller [anthony_schiller @ hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 9:00 AM
To: Dempsey, Frank
Subject: FW: Deck
Mr. Dempsey,
I am forwarding an email that our neighbor sent to us. I am not sure if they also sent it to you or not...
Thank you,
Anthony Schiller
21077 Istria Path
Lakeville, MN
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 22:01:49 -0500
Subject: Deck
From: combsmaggie @gmail.com
To: Anthony_Schiller @hotmail.com
To Whom It May Concern:
I was approached with an offer to purchase a portion of our lot to allow the Schiller's the ability to build a
deck, but have no interest selling. However, I have seen the plans for the Schiller's deck, and have no
problem with the proposed plans. I support giving the Schiller's a variance to build the deck as proposed.
Please contact me at (952) 239 -0956 if you have any questions for me.
Thank you,
Maggie Combs
6/13/2011
Page 1 of 1
Dempsey, Frank
From: Ron Mullenbach [ron.mullenbach @yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 8:37 AM
To: Dempsey, Frank
Subject: Schiller Variance Request
Frank
I received notice regarding the above - referenced variance request. I have seen the plans and
support the request.
Thank you.
Ron Mullenbach
9816 211th Street West
Lakeville, MN 55044
6/13/2011
Page 1 of 1
Memorandum
To: Planning Commission
From: Frank Dempsey, Associate Planner
Date: June 10, 2011
Subject: Packet Material for the June 16, 2011 Planning Commission Meeting
Agenda
Item: Schiller Variance
Application
Deadline: July 24, 2011
BACKGROUND SUMMARY
EXHIBITS
r n No.
City of Lakeville
Planning Department
Anthony and Ann Schiller have submitted an application for a building setback variance to
allow the construction of a deck onto the rear of their existing house. The new deck
proposes a setback of 20 feet to the rear property line. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 30
foot setback for a deck constructed more than 30 inches above grade from the main level of
the house on a lot preliminary platted after March 17, 2003. The preliminary plat of
Chadwick Farm was approved on May 24, 2004. The house was constructed in 2006 with a
33 foot rear yard setback. A main level deck ledger for a future deck was constructed with
the house at that time. The rear yard setback for decks on a lot with a preliminary plat
approved prior to March 17, 2003 is 10 feet. The property is zoned RS -3, Single Family
Residential District.
A. Aerial Photos (2 pages)
B. Boundary Survey
C. Deck Floor Plan
D. Side and Rear View Perspectives (4 pages)
E. Applicant Narrative, dated May 24, 2011
F. Neighbor letter dated May 18, 2011 and email dated June 5, 2011 (2 pages)
VARIANCE ANALYSIS
Section 11- 17 -11A.2 of the Zoning Ordinance lists the setback requirements for
decks. Subsection b requires a 30 foot rear yard setback for the Schiller's deck.
Because the Schiller's house is set back only 33 feet from the rear property line, due
to the abnormally shall depth of their lot, the deck could be constructed to a depth of
only three feet. The Schillers are proposing a deck that will be 16 feet deep by 20
wide. The purpose of the change in setback requirements in 2003 was due to
concerns that elevated decks were allowed to be constructed to within 5 feet of side
lot lines and 10 feet of rear lot lines and could be the source of noise complaints
given how close the decks were to adjoining properties and buildings. The current
30 foot setback requirement for decks was adopted on May 5, 2003 and remains in
effect today.
The Schiller's house is a walk -out design with a patio door above a ledger for a future
deck attached to the rear of the main level of the house. The proposed deck will be
16 feet deep by 20 feet wide, including the stairs, and will be set back 20 feet from
the rear property line, 28 feet from the west side property line and 27 feet from the
east side property line. The practical depth of the deck is 13 feet, four inches due to
a two foot, eight inch bay that provides the access to the deck from inside the house.
The nearest houses to the proposed deck are as follows:
East — 81 feet
West — 101 feet and 124 feet
South — 86 feet
All of the other houses in the area either have decks on the rear of the houses or
they have adequate lot depth to allow a future deck and meet setback requirements.
An examination of other properties in the development does not indicate the
potential for similar variance requests to allow the construction of a rear yard deck.
One letter and one email have been received from neighbors of the Schiller's both in
support of the variance. Copies of the letter and email are attached.
On May 16, 2011 new State of Minnesota legislation concerning variance criteria
became law. The new variance criteria were presented to the Planning Commission
at their June 2, 2011 work session. The City Attorney has prepared a draft Zoning
Ordinance amendment incorporating the new State variance criteria for consideration
at a July 2011 Planning Commission meeting. In the interim, the City Attorney
recommends we use the new State variance criteria instead of the existing variance
criteria listed in Section 11 -6 -5 of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed amendment
to Section 11 -6 -5 of the Zoning Ordinance incorporating the new State variance
criteria is as follows:
2
11 -6 -5 REVIEW CRITERIA:
The board of adjustment shall not approve any variance request (major or minor)
unless they find failure to grant the variance will result in practical difficulties.
"Practical difficulties" means that the property owner proposes to use the property in
a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Economic conditions
alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not
limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The
following criteria must also be met:
A. That the variance would be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
B. That the variance would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of
the Zoning Ordinance.
C. That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the
property not created by the landowner.
D. That the purpose of the variance is not exclusively economic considerations.
E. That the granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located.
F. That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the
practival difficulty.
G. Variances may not be approved for any use that is not allowed under this
section for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.
Staff's review of the Schiller's variance application finds that it meets the above
criteria. Findings of fact for approval of the variance request are attached for your
consideration.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning Department staff recommends approval of the variance subject to the following
stipulations:
1. The deck shall be constructed in accordance with the site plan approved by
the City Council.
2. The setback of the deck or any appurtenance of the deck shall be set back no
closer than 20 feet from the rear property line.
3
Print Preview
Dakota County, MN
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not
guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,
appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
Map Scale
1 inch = 498 feet
Page 1 of 1
http: / /gis.co. dakota. mn. us / website / dakotanetgis /printPreview.aspx ?PrintOptData= Dakota County, MNI0101t... 6/7/2011
Print Preview
Dakota County, MN
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not
guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,
appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
Map Scale
1 inch = 99 feet
Page 1 of 1
http: / /gis.co. dakota. mn. us / website /dakotanetgis /printPreview.aspx ?PrintOptData = Dakota County, MN10101t... 6/7/2011
15.12
S 62.55'29° w
7
/ _ I
- - - -.— 124.0
�w co 4a
Scale: 1" = 40'
Date 19
101.89
N 5011'53" E
7
7
/
May 2011
N
W
0
O W
m
/ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
for
HILLER
211th Street
I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or
report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly Registered
Land Surveyor under the Laws of the State
of ,:.. of
Ray H. Brandt
Reg. No. 8140
DESCRIPTION
Existing j
Lot 8, Block 3,
CHADWICK FARM SECOND
Dakota County, Minnesota
Plat bearings shown
o Denotes iron monument
Proposed
D51 -81 -11
BRANDT ENGINEERING & SURVEYING, LLC
1713 Southcross Drive West, Suite A
Burnsville, MN 55306
(952) 435 -1966
D51 -81 -11
0
co U
1 0
0 U O t - r Z
¢ J i 0 - ¢ W W N
W F-- W J N V Z ▪ Z F-- _ M
I-- ¢ K •1 0 0 3 Q y 0 M UI I-- ,.)
W U = (i h U H 1-
2 m v i o >-: ~ r I — Q LO L(7 O O¢ Z¢0 N
¢o � ▪ �N o ¢ter a oa vi •—° o ° o no_L o n
E-,
°ma 0 ao NNa. hex ¢ H¢ - Ce V W ) (O E0Z�
W V L N
< 0 X O , L W Z = 0 N iy 0- 0 S 0 W m O N
�� co ,"-
r W � ZN �H N I (n ¢ ¢U J CC 0 W Lo ¢ �° LA X°a t , M I- Iii Q.o WQO7,, LA ��O CA- 0W2 N� WO< �Od 0 0__ < O mWNm ,,M
_ N a' Z _ _I
C � 0 V 00 ~ 0 (O ¢ ( = /1 H Fes- N O ce (.� !nom X ¢ ° H H I I I- r0 0 ¢ M JF I - - J I- N
F' w N 0 0 X N O 43 _3000 X W CC S Q W W E W^ LAD W =¢ p 2¢ La
w h d':..An0 co VI 01 I- Li Q) CO X NN J ¢CC Ln00 � �0 �. -I-:J <00-,VIU�
O
cn c� J
2 iri ¢
(, ± z VI
(� R. F 0 Li
F I- W U' y (1/1 0 K
o VI < 0 N (n ¢ 0 ¢ ¢ F
OW d m J �2 0 t:r (n
EXHIBIT D
May 24, 2011
Mr. Frank Dempsey
City of Lakeville
20195 Holyoke Avenue
Lakeville, MN 55044
RE: Variance Request
Dear Mr. Dempsey:
We respectfully request approval of a variance to allow the construction of a deck on the back of our home, which
is located at 21077 Istria Path. The variance is needed because the proposed deck would encroach into the
required 30' rear yard setback for decks exceeding 30" in height. We ask that the following factors be considered
in reviewing our request:
• Our home has a walkout basement and a patio door set into a bay off the main floor of the house. The
proposed deck is a reasonable use of our home and is consistent with the design, size, and location of
other decks in the neighborhood and will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Our
home has depth and width dimensions typical of those found in the neighborhood and other
neighborhoods within Lakeville.
• Due to the patio door being located within a bay that extends 2' 8" outward from the rest of the house,
the actual inside dimension of the deck is 13'4" which we have considered to be a minimum depth
necessary to comfortably allow for deck furniture, a grill, and access around the outside of the furniture
and seating areas.
• Our property is much shallower (110') than the typical residential lot in our neighborhood and the RS -3
zoning district (130').
• The orientation of our lot and adjacent lots in relation to one another maximizes distances between our
deck and our neighbors' decks. In fact, two existing decks on adjacent lots are currently located
approximately the same distance apart from each other as our proposed deck is from the nearest
neighboring deck.
• The rear lot line of our lot is the rear lot line of Lot 10, which is an irregularly deep lot.
• Up until May 5, 2003, the setback for this deck from the rear yard of the lot would have been 10'. The
zoning ordinance update approved on May 5, 2003 increased the required setback for decks greater than
30" above grade from 10' to 30'. Our deck is proposed to be located just over 20' from the rear lot line.
Therefore, it is likely that decks throughout much of Lakeville are closer to their rear lot line than what we
are proposing with our deck.
• Under current City Code, detached storage buildings larger than our proposed deck could be built within
10' of the rear lot line and with a total height higher than the deck we are proposing to build.
We have included copies of our deck plans and a survey showing the relationship of our lot in relation to our
neighbors. Thank you for consideration of our request. Please contact us should you have any questions. Thank
you.
Sinc
tl
nth • and Ann Schiller
21077 Istria Path
EXHIBIT E
May 18, 2011
Mr. Frank Dempsey
City of Lakeville
20195 Holyoke Avenue
Lakeville, MN 55044
RE: Variance Request at 21077 Istria Path
Dear Mr. Dempsey:
It is my understanding that Anthony and Ann Schilling intend to request a variance to allow the
construction of a deck attached to the rear of their home. The rear of my home is the closest
of any of the adjoining properties to the proposed improvements. I have reviewed the plans for
this deck and its relationship to my property and fully support their request, without any
additional conditions imposed, for a variance from the rear yard setback requirement.
George Seagraves
9801 211 Street West
Lakeville, MN 55044
EXHIBIT F
Dempsey, Frank
From: Brian Hilliard [blhilliard @hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 8:55 AM
To: Dempsey, Frank
Subject: Schiller Setback Variance - 21077 Istria Path
Hi Frank -
My name is Brian Hilliard and my wife is Tanya Hilliard. We live at 9770 211th ST W. We will not be able
to make the hearing on 6/16 regarding the Schiller's request for a setback variance. So, if possible, I
would like to submit our comments to support the approval of this request via email. We have no
concerns regarding the setback variance for the purpose of building a deck.
Thanks,
Brian & Tanya Hilliard
6/7/2011
Page 1 of 1
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
SCHILLER VARIANCE
`FINDINGS OF FACT
On June 16, 2011, the Lakeville Planning Commission met to consider the
application of Anthony and Anne Schiller for a variance to allow a rear yard setback less
than 30 feet for an attached deck in the RS -3, Single Family Residential District at 21077
Istria Path. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed
variance preceded by published and mailed notice. The applicant was present and the
Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is zoned RS -3, Single Family Residential District.
2. The property is located in Planning District No. 6 and is classified as Low Density
Residential in the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The legal description of the property is:
Lot 8, Block 3, CHADWICK FARM SECOND, Dakota County, Minnesota.
4. State of Minnesota Statute concerning variance criteria was amended and
became low effective May 6, 2011. State Statute requires that cities shall not
approve any variance request unless they find that certain criteria have been
met. The criteria and our findings regarding them are:
a) That the variance would be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The proposed deck variance will be consistent with the City's Comprehensive
Plan which guides the Chadwick Farm neighborhood for low density residential
uses.
b) That the variance would be in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Title.
The proposed deck variance will be consistent with the 2003 Zoning
Ordinance amendment that increased the setback requirement for elevated
decks to provide greater separation between elevated decks and homes on
adjoining lots. The Schiller's proposed deck will be set back more than 80
feet from the nearest home or adjoining lot.
c) That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to
the property not created by the landowner.
The shallow depth of the Schiller's lot (110 feet) is unique in the in the
Chadwick Farm neighborhood. Single family lots in Chadwick Farm are
typically 130 feet or greater in depth.
d) That the purpose of the variance is not exclusively economic
considerations.
The proposed deck variance is not due exclusively to economic
considerations.
e) That the granting of the variance will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located.
The Schiller's proposed deck will be in keeping with the character of the
Chadwick Farm neighborhood.
f) That the requested variance is the minimum action required to
eliminate the practical difficulty.
The proposed deck design takes into account the existing bay access on the
back of the house to allow adequate use of the deck with a reasonable
encroachment into the rear yard setback.
g) Variances may not be approved for any use that is not allowed
under this section for property in the zone where the affected
person's land is located.
Decks are a permitted use in the RS -3, Single Family Residential District.
5. The planning report dated June 10, 2011 and prepared by Associate Planner,
Frank Dempsey is incorporated herein.
2