Planning Commission - 05/22/2006 APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, MAY 22, 2006 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
BOARD MEMBERS: Jon Duckstad, John Kirk, Vicki Koenig,
Jerry Pitzrick, Frank Powell, Peter Rocheford,
Fred Seymour, Ray Stoelting, Jon Stoltz
STAFF MEMBERS: Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources
Al Gray, City Engineer
Mike Franzen, City Planner
Julie Krull, Recording Secretary
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL
Chair Stoelting called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Absent: Rocheford, Seymour,
and Stoltz.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION by Koenig, seconded by Kirk, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 6-0.
III. MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 8, 2006
Koenig was not present at the meeting but asked for clarification of the last sentence on
the bottom of page 3. Franzen clarified that is should say, "give credit for the spaces
where the cars are parked at the pump islands." Koenig also stated that under"Member's
Reports" where it states that Kirk attended the Way Finding Committee and talked about
NCA issues, it should be "MCA".
MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Pitzrick, to approve the minutes. Motion carried 5-0.
Koenig abstained.
IV. PUBLIC MEETING
V. INFORMATIONAL MEETING
Planning Commission Minutes
May 22, 2006
Page 2
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. VARIANCE#2006-04 by Nanette K. Mastaln. Request to:
To permit a front yard setback of 20 feet for a deck replacement. City Code
requires a 30 foot front yard setback in the R1-9.5 zoning district.. Location of
the property is 16391 Adret Court.
Nanette Mastaln,homeowner at 16391 Adret Court,presented the proposal. She
started out by stating that this variance is for a rear yard setback and not a front
yard setback. She stated that her property is unique in that there are streets on
both sides of the property. What she is asking for in her proposal is to just replace
the 10' x 20' deck and not to add any additional footage to the deck. She pointed
out that when she purchased the home last June it was in great disrepair. She has
since replaced the windows, sliding glass door, trim and doors on the inside of her
home. She stated that she noticed the deck, including the stairs and ledger board,
were rotten,but could not be replaced until this spring. When her contractor went
to pull the permit they found out that the original permit was for a 10' x 10' deck
that was pulled years ago and that is the reason for the variance request. Ms.
Mastaln also pointed out that one of the major reasons she purchased her home
was because of the size of the deck. Because she is severely allergic to grass, the
only way she can enjoy her yard is to be out on her deck. Ms. Mastaln also stated
that she does have signatures from her immediate neighbors to show their
approval of the new deck.
Stoelting reiterated what the State regulations define as hardships and asked Ms.
Mastaln to explain her hardships. Ms. Mastaln stated her hardships include the
fact that she should not be penalized for what the previous owners did to the
home. She also stated that she is unable to use her rear yard unless she walks out
her front door and around to the rear yard. Stoelting asked if the neighbors on
both sides of her home signed off on the list. Ms. Mastaln stated that they did
sign off on the list.
Powell stated that the property appears unique due to its shape and pointed out
that the back yard could be perceived as a front yard. He said because of this he
feels that the fence between her home and Duck Lake Road needs to be
maintained. He asked Ms. Mastaln who owns the fence. Ms. Mastaln stated that
she does own the fence and it is currently being maintained.
Duckstad asked Ms. Mastaln if she was aware that there was a problem with the
non-conforming deck when she purchased the home. Ms. Mastaln stated that she
was unaware of any non-conforming issues and was only made aware of the
situation when her builder pulled the permit for the deck.
Planning Commission Minutes
May 22, 2006
Page 3
Duckstad asked Franzen if there was an error in the notes when it refers to this
variance as a front yard setback. Franzen stated that since the property is
bordered by two streets, there are technically two front yards. He said that in this
situation, what needs to be taken into consideration is the actual horizontal
distance between the proposed deck and the curb line. He pointed out that in a
typical residential street in Eden Prairie a home is usually situated 46' away from
the curb line, 35` feet for the setback and 11 feet for the right of way or
boulevard. In this particular situation, this house is set back 58'from the curb line
and when 10' is subtracted for the deck, she has a setback of 48', which is greater
than the normal setback.
Duckstad asked Ms. Mastain about her health problem and if she does have
problems walking out on the grass. Ms. Mastain stated that she has a severe
allergic reaction to fresh cut grass and has been hospitalized three times in the
past prior to purchasing this home for this allergic reaction. She pointed out that
this deck would allow her to be in her yard without being on the grass.
Stoelting asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated that for all of
the decks he has looked at in Eden Prairie, a 10' x 10' deck would not be large
enough and certainly a 10' x 20' deck is still small in relationship to other decks
in Eden Prairie. Franzen pointed out that the footings and structural elements are
in place for the deck out there now, which is currently non-conforming, and if this
variance is approved, the City would be allowing an exception to the Code and
the deck would no longer be considered non-conforming.
Pitzrick asked Ms. Mastain about her framing plan and questioned her about her
staircase going beyond the 10' x 20' deck plan and that the stairway would go
further into the setback area. Ms. Mastain stated that she had talked with a
representative of the City and they told her that the stairway is not considered to
infringe into the setback area. Franzen confirmed that the stairway is not
considered and encroachment into the setback area.
Koenig asked if the replacement of the deck would impact any of the existing
trees. Ms. Mastain stated that the building of the deck would not impact any of
the existing trees.
Duckstad asked Franzen if Ms. Mastain is being penalized because of the
smallness of her lot. Franzen stated that what should be looked at is the shape and
depth of the lot and not the size.
Koenig stated that Ms. Mastain's allergies are a valid hardship.
Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input.
Planning Commission Minutes
May 22, 2006
Page 4
Terry Herbst, the neighbor right next door to the proponent, at 16407 Adret Court,
stated that she is in favor of her neighbor rebuilding the deck and she and her
husband appreciate the work Ms. Mastain has done on her home.
MOTION by Koenig, seconded by Kirk, to close the public hearing. Motion
carried 6-0.
MOTION by Koenig, seconded by Kirk, to approve the front yard setback
variance of 20 feet for a deck replacement based on plans stamped dated May 5,
2006, and the staff report dated May 19, 2006. Motion carried 6-0.
VII. MEMBERS' REPORTS
VIII. CONTINUING BUSINESS
Stoelting asked Franzen if the Joint City Council Planning Commission Meeting has been
rescheduled. Franzen stated that is has not been rescheduled.
IX. NEW BUSINESS
X. PLANNERS' REPORTS
Franzen stated that the June 10th Planning Commission meeting will have two items on
the agenda. The first item being a variance for a building addition and the second item
being an addition to the Southwest Metro bus garage.
XI.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Koenig, seconded by Kirk, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:38 p.m.