2 VAR 135 Choctaw Circle., - -PROPOSAL:
'LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
_ ? DENSITy: . .-
'-' :. } ~D LAND uses:'
135 ChoctaW CirCle (Lot:S2; modk:Z. L6~S L~e EstateS):
135 Choctaw Circle
974-0745
,C1000LAND USE PLAN:
~0 ~" H 'P~i uessequeqo el, o]~.O / ,, ....
X
Weatherby Variance
December 1, 1999
Page 2
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Section 20-615 of the zoning ordinance requires a 30 foot rear yard setback for properties zoned
RSF (Attachment 2).
Section 20-908 (5) (d) states that decks may encroach 5 feet into a required rear yard setback
(Attachment 3).
BACKGROUND
This property is part of Lotus Lake Estates, platted in 1978. According to our building files, this
home was built in 1979. The existing home and detached garage meet the required front, rear,
and side yard setbacks.
Rear Elevation of 135 Choctaw Circle
The applicant proposes to remove the main level existing deck and replace it with a larger one.
The existing deck meets the required rear yard setback, but the proposal does not. The zoning
ordinance permits decks to encroach 5 feet into a required front, rear or side yard setback.
Therefore, the required rear yard setback for a deck is 25 feet.
The lot is approximately 21,504 sq. ft. in area (20,000 sq. ft. is required). It is an average of 112
feet in width (90 feet required) and 192 feet in depth.
The site does not abut Lotus Lake, but rather abuts Outlot B. This outlot, according to the
development contract, "shall be reserved for the sole use of the property owners within the plat of
Lotus Lake Estates in gaining pedestrian access to Lotus Lake." It further states that "no portion
of Outlot B shall be developed, altered or disturbed in any way except after first having obtained
a permit fi'om the Chanhassen City Council for any such development, alteration or disturbance."
Weatherby Variance
December 1, 1999
Page 3
ANALYSIS
The applicant is requesting a 15 foot variance from the 30 foot rear yard setback for the
reconstruction of a deck. The proposal seeks to construct a portion of a deck on the rear
elevation of the home 15 feet from the property line.
The purpose of the variance request is to allow the applicant to construct a deeper deck near the
dining room and install stairs into a required setback. The deeper deck is needed to
accommodate a table and 8 chairs. The stairs are to be relocated because of the deeper deck.
The deck projects 19 feet from the home at its farthest point. The following picture shows where
the deck will project into the required setback.
Site Characteristics
The topography of the site does not limit the buildable area to the extent a variance is needed to
construct a deck. The northwest corner of the existing home is only 33 feet from the property
line, but a deck can be constructed without a variance.
Permitted Use
This site is zoned RSF, Single Family Residential. A single family home can be legally
constructed on the site. The zoning ordinance (Section 20-1124 (2) f) requires two parking
spaces, both of which shall be completely enclosed for single-family dwellings. Currently, a
single family dwelling with a two-stall garage is on site, including decks on three floors.
Weatherby Variance
December 1, 1999
Page 4
Reasonable Use
A reasonable use is defined as the use made by a majority of comparable property within 500
feet. A "use" can be defined as "the purpose or activity for which land or buildings are designed,
arranged or intended or for which land or buildings are occupied or maintained." In this case,
because it is in a RSF zoning district, a reasonable use is a single-family home with a two-stall
garage. The property owner has a reasonable use of the site.
In order to justify a variance, the applicant must demonstrate a hardship, that is, a reasonable use
cannot be constructed on the site without a variance. Although staff would like to see the
applicant construct a larger deck, it is clear other options are available. In Attachment 5, staff
revised the deck configuration so that it meets the required setback. The deck can be increased to
11 feet in depth off of the family room and the stairs can remain in their existing location.
Neighborhood Setbacks
Staff performed an aerial survey of the surrounding properties in Lotus Lake Estates and found
that the majority meets all required setbacks. Approving this variance will deviate from the rear
yard setbacks in the neighborhood.
Since the application does not meet the criteria required to grant a variance, staff recommends
denial.
FINDINGS
The Plarming Commission shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts:
ao
That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship. Undue
hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size,
physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a
majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to
allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre-existing standards in
this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing
downward from them meet these criteria.
Finding: The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship. The property
owner can construct a deck and enjoy the scenery without a variance. Also, approving the
variance will depart downward from pre-existing standards and create a new neighborhood
re~ yard setback.
bo
The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to
other property within the same zoning classification.
Weatherby Variance
December 1, 1999
Page 5
Finding: The conditions upon which this variance is based are applicable to all properties
in the RSF zoning district.
Co
The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income
potential of the parcel of land.
Finding: The new deck will increase the value of the property, however, staff does not
believe that is the sole reason for the request.
d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship.
Finding: The applicant is not the original owner of the home, so the hardship is not self-
created. However, the applicant can reconstruct a deck within the required setback.
The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located.
Finding: The variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. However, this
variance will allow a deck to be located closer to a rear property line than found in other
cases.
The proposed variation will not 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 endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values
within the neighborhood.
Finding: The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets. However,
the variance will allow a deck to be built closer to an outlot, which has been established for
other residents of the development to enjoy Lotus Lake, than the ordinance permits.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion:
"The Planning Commission denies Variance #99~19 for a 15 foot variance from the 30 foot rear
yard setback for the reconstruction of a deck based upon the staff report and the following:
1. A deck can be constructed within the required setbacks.
2. The property owner has a reasonable use of the property."
Weatherby Variance
December 1, 1999
Page 6
ATTACHMENTS
1. Application and Letter
2. Section 20-615, RSF District Requirements
3. Section 20-908, Yard Encroachments
4. Lot Survey and Plans
5. Staff Revised Deck Plans
6. Public hearing notice and property owners
g:\plan\ck\boa\wcatherby 99-19 vat.doc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937-1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
APPLICANT:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE (Day time)
/~'OWNER:
ADDRESS:
NOV 1999
TELEPHONE: ~ 17.. - q74- 0 74~
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Temporary Sales Permit
Conditional Use Permit
Interim Use Permit
, Non-conforming Use Permit
Vacation of ROW/Easements
Wetland Alteration Permit
Planned Unit Development*
Zoning Appeal
Rezoning
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Sign Permits
__ Sign Plan Review
Notification Sign
Site Plan Review*
Subdivision*
X Escr~Mt~Rligg Fees/Attorney Cost**
(($50 C~.~U P/S P R/VAC/VAR/WA P/Metes
~a71d"Bounds, $..~._400 Minor SUB)
TOTAL FEE $
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the
application. ~,.~
Building materialsamples must be ~d with s~ews,
/ ~e~~~st ~~'/~di a~/~
*Twenty~ix full size b ng
folded co ' plan itted, ' ~luding an 8~,~ ' X 11" red
transpi~ency for eachplan
** E/°w will be req~°r °th~a/~cati°ns th~'~0~devel°pment c~.'
NOTE - W~en multiple.ac~lications are prdcessed, the appro~riCe'fee shall be charged fo~ each application.
LOCATION
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TOTAL ACREAGE
WETLANDS PRESENT
PRESENT ZONING
REQUESTED ZONING
YES X NO
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST ~.~,~t~g'Tt,~r- ~A~t~' ~'4p-.. (:oM..~Tl~C'/'to~ ~ ~c/~.~-~t,,-'-/-
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning
Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written
notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application.
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with
all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom
the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either
copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make
this application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing
requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day
extension
extensions are approved by the applicant.
Si n~ ofAp~ /
Application Received on I I · ZHF. ~[ ~"
for development review. Development review shall be
completed within 120 days unless additional review
Date
Fee Paid ~J2 --7' k~-'7 ~4Z) ~ ~::7 ~--
Receipt No.
The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting.
If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address.
199
Weatherby Deck Proposal
135 Choctaw Circle
Chanhassen, MN 55317
REQUEST FOR VARIANCE
We are requesting a variance on our deck proposal in order to provide a more functional
structure which better meets our needs. We use our deck nearly every day from spring
through fall, and would like to be able to dine on the deck with a few guests, or with our
children and their guests, girlfriends, boyfriends, etc., which would require an area with
sufficient space to place a table with 6 to 8 chairs. Because of the three French doors on
the back of the current deck and its multiple levels (see Deck Plan and Rear Elevation
diagrams), there is no area on the current deck in which to place a table for 6 without
blocking a doorway or traffic flow. We believe that the proposed deck offers the best
solution, both functionally and aesthetically, by situating the widest part of the deck
away from the exit doors (out from the dining room in the Proposed Deck Plan diagram).
Situating the wider area of the deck as a triangular extension out from the main body of
the deck serves the functional of moving the seating area away from the flow of traffic
on the deck, while minimizing the square footage of deck extending beyond the setback
area.
Because our home is situated deeper in its lot than adjacent homes, the area of the deck
for which a variance is requested is not visible from any other home, in our
neighborhood or any other. Although visible from Outlot B (which separates our
property from Lotus Lake), what little walking traffic there is in the Outlot occurs mainly
along a path approximately 120 feet from the house, in an area approximately 6 to 8 feet
lower than the grade near the house and deck. When viewed from the majority of the
common property area, we believe there would be very little detectable visible difference
in the apparent shape or size of the proposed deck, as compared with the current
structure. We feel that granting of this variance will in no way be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the area. In fact, based on
other cosmetic improvements which we plan for the new deck (iron railings, etc.), we
believe that the proposed deck would be significantly more visually appealing than the
current one to those residents walking through the common property, and that the new
deck would be seen as an enhancement to the overall appearance of the neighborhood.
We have spoken with several of our neighbors regarding this proposed deck plan, and
know of no one so far who has any concerns about situating a small portion of the
proposed deck nearer than 25 feet from the property line between our lot and the
common property (Outlot B). We hope that you will favorably consider this request.
R. Paul Weatherby
Kristine Weatherby
§ 20-595
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
b. For accessory structures, three (3) stories/forty (40) feet.
(7) The minimum driveway separation is as follows:
a. If the driveway is on a collector street, four hundred (400) feet.
b. If the driveway is on an arterial street, one thousand two hundred fifty (1,250)
feet.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 4(5-4-5), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 127, § 2, 3-26-90; Ord. No. 170, § 2, 6-8-92;
Ord. No. 194, § 2, 10-11-93)
Sec. 20-596. Interim uses.
The following are interim uses in the "RR" District:
(1) Commercial kennels and stables.
(Ord. No. 120, § 3, 2-12-90)
Editor's note--Inasmuch as there exists a § 20-595, the provisions added by § 3 of Ord. No.
120 as § 20-595 have been redesignated as § 20-596.
Secs. 20-597--20-610. Reserved.
ARTICI.E XII. '~RSF" SINGLE-FAMU.Y RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Sec. 20-611. Intent.
The intent of the "RSF" District is to provide for single-family residential subdivisions.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5-1), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-612. Pemitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in an "RSF" District:
(1) Single-family dwellings.
(2) Public and private open space.
(3) State-licensed day care center for twelve (12) or fewer children.
(4) State-licensed group home serving six (6) or fewer persons.
(5) Utility services.
(6) Temporary real estate office and model home.
(7) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5-2), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 259, § 11, 11-12-96)
Sec. 20-613. Pemitted accessory uses.
The following are permitted accessory uses in an "RSF" District:
(1) Garage.
Supp. No. 9 1210
ZONING § 20-615
(2) Storage building.
(3) Swimming pool.
(4) Tennis court.
(5) Signs.
(6) Home occupations.
(7) One (1) dock.
(8) Private kennel.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5-3), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-614. Conditional uses.
The following are conditional uses in an "RSF" District:
(1) Churches.
(2) Reserved.
(3) Recreational beach lots.
(4) Towers as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5.4), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 120, § 4(4), 2-12-90; Ord. No. 259, § 12,
11-12-96)
State law reference--Conditional uses, M.S. § 462.3595.
Sec. 20-615. Lot requirements and setbacks. .~
The following minimum requirements shall be observed in an "RSF" District subject to
additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in this chapter and chapter 18:
(1) The minimum lot area is fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet. For neck or flag lots,
the lot area requirements shall be met after the area contained within the "neck" has
been excluded from consideration.
(2) The minimum lot frontage is ninety (90) feet, except that lots fronting on a cul-de-sac
"bubble" or along the outside curve of curvilinear street sections shall be ninety (90)
feet in width at the building setback line. The location of this lot is conceptually
Supp. No. 9 1211
§ 20-615 CHANI4_ASSEN CITY CODE
illustrated below.
(3)
Lot, Where Frontage le
H,t,ured At 8etbtok Line
The minimum lot depth is one hundred twenty-five (125) feet. The location of these lots
is conceptually illustrated below. Lot width on neck or flag lots and lots accessed by
private driveways shall be one hundred (100) feet as measured at the front building
setback line.
Neck I Fllg Lots
Fro~/ Lot Line
: , /;,
100/Lot Width ~z._j j !
I I ~* I
; I I I
....
(4) The maximum lot coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is twenty-five (25)
percent.
(5) The setbacks are as follows:
a. For front yards, thirty (30) feet.
( rear yards, thirty (30) feet.
For
Supp. No. 9 1212
ZONING § 20-632
c. For side yards, ten (10) feet.
(6) The setbacks for lots served by private driveways and/or neck lots are as follows:
a. For front yard, thirty (30) feet. The front yard shall be the lot line nearest the
public right-of-way that provides access to the parcel. The rear yard lot line is to
be located opposite from the front lot line with the remaining exposures treated
as side lot lines. On neck lots the front yard setback shall be measured at the
point nearest the front lot line where the lot achieves a one-hundred-foot
minimum width.
b. For rear yards, thirty (30) feet.
c. For side yards, ten (10) feet.
(7) The maximum height is as follows:
a. For the principal structure, three (3) stories/forty (40) feet.
b. · For accessory structures, twenty (20) feet.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5-5), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 90, § 1, 3-14-88; Ord. No. 127, § 3, 3-26-90;
Ord. No. 145, § 2, 4-8-91; Ord. No. 240, § 18, 7-24-95)
Editor's note---Section 2 of Ord. No. 145 purported to amend § 20-615(6)b. pertaining to
accessory structures; such provision were contained in § 20-615(7)b., subsequent to amend-
ment of the section by Ord. No. 127. Hence, the provisions of Ord. No. 145, § 2, were included
as amending § 20-615(?)b.
Sec. 20-616. Interim uses.
The following are interim uses in the "RSF" District:
(1) Private stables subject to provisions of chapter 5, article IV.
(2) Commercial stables with a minimum lot size of five (5) acres.
(Ord. No. 120, § 3, 2-12-90)
Secs. 20-617N20-630. Reserved.
ARTICLE XlII. '~R-4" MIXED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Sec. 20-631. Intent.
The intent of the "R-4" District is to provide for single-family and attached residential
development at a maximum net density of four (4) dwelling units per acre.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 6(5-6-1), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-632. Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in an "R-4" District:
(1) Single-family dwellings.
(2) Two-family dwellings.
Supp. No. 9 1213
ZONING § 20-908
increased in width or depth by an additional foot over the side and rear yards required
for the highest building otherwise permitted in the district.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VI, § 10, 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-908. Yard regulations.
The following requirements qualify or supplement district regulations. Yard measurements
shall be taken from the nearest point of the wall of a building to the lot line in question, subject
to the following qualifications:
(1) Every part of a required yard or court shall be open and unobstructed.
(2) Ayard, court, or other open space of one (1) building used to comply with the provisions
of this chapter shall not again be used as a yard, court, or other open space for another
building.
(3) Except as provided in the business, industrial, and office districts, the front yard
setback requirements shall be observed on each street side of a corner lot; provided,
however, that the remaining two (2) yards will meet the side yard setbacks.
(4) On double frontage lots, the required front yard shall be provided on both streets.
Whenever possible, structures should face the existing street,
(5) The following shall not be considered to be obstructions (variances granted from a
required setback are not entitled to the following additional encroachments):
a. Into any required front yard, or required side yard adjoining a side street lot line,
cornices, canopies, eaves, or other architectural features may project a distance
not exceeding two (2) feet, six (6) inches; fire escapes may project a distance not
exceeding four (4) feet, six (6) inches; an uncovered stair and necessary landings
may project a distance not to exceed six (6) feet, provided such stair and landing
shall not extend above the entrance floor of the building; bay windows, balconies,
open porches and chimneys may project a distance not exceeding three (3) feet;
unenclosed decks and patios may project a distance not exceeding five (5) feet and
shall not be located in a drainage and utility easement. Other canopies may be
permitted by conditional use permit.
b. The above-named features may project into any required yard adjoining an
interior lot line, subject to the limitations cited above.
c. Porches that encroach into the required front yard and which were in existence on
February 19, 1987 may be enclosed or completely rebuilt in the same location
provided that any porch that is to be completely rebuilt must have at least a
ten-foot minimum front yard.
Subject to the setback in section the
requirements
20-904,
following
are
permitted
in the rear yard: enclosed or open off-street parking spaces; accessory structures,
toolrooms, and similar buildings or structures for domestic storage.. Balconies,
breezeways and open porches, unenclosed decks and patios, and one-stow ba?
windows may project into the rear yard a distance not to exceed five (5) feet.
Supp. No. 10 1233
tuoo~I
moo'kI ~u~.u!(I
cuoo~
'W.O. 277-79 55/44 Survey For: MINNESOTA CENTURY BUILDERS
SUNDE LAND SURVEYING, INC. EDWARD H. SUNDE
9001 EAST BLOOMINGTON FREEWAY (35W} · BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55420 · 612-881-2455
SurVeyor's Certificate
808
O-
I
/ J
t
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION '
Lot 32, Block 2, LOTUS LAKE ESTATES,
according to the recorded plat thereof, Carver
County, Minnesota.
* Proposed Garage Floor elevation =
* Proposed Front House Entry elevation =
'-* Proposed Top of Block elevation =
/
~ 0 >,
APPROVED"
~r..
DEPTi
U
DATEi
BY:
DEP.Ti
DATE/
DEP~
The proposed elvations and proposed house
location are subject to review and change
by the City Engineer, Building Dept.,
developer and owner. Proposed grades and
house location which are approved by the
City are final.
NOV'
Ne hereby certify that this is a true and
correct representation of a'survey of the
boundaries of the land above described and
of the location of all buildings, if any,
from or on said land.
Dated this 17th day of September 1979.
SUNDE LAND SURVEYING, INC.
BY: (-~-,-~ ~,-~-
Edward H. Sunde, R.L.S.
Reg. No. 8612
moo~
moo~l 4~eOH moo~
moo~l Ou!u!d ·
~aoog t/auau_~
alaa!O /n~%oott:D
I!~%eCl U~ld ~loeCl
C! $°15n0
Lotus L~ke
Lot line
........ '1 I ". ......... ;...;..~'J' "'" '-" ,'- .... - ', .' " ..... .''' ·
Weatherby .......
SWaflSOfl
Choctaw Circle
8661. ~ 0 AON
Zl~gg NI~I
~uoo~
tuoo~! ~u!u!dI
uaoo~ H%a~aFt
ala~lO ,~o~:~oqD GGt
NOISIA31d O3SOdOl:ld .-I_-IV. LS
~ ~ol~nO
~661, :..):,- 0 AOF]
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING -~
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1999 AT 7:00 P.M.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
690 CITY CENTER DRIVE
PROPOSAL: Variance Request for Deck
APPLICANT: R. Paul & Kristine Weatherby
LOCATION: 135 Choctaw Circle
NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The
applicants, R. Paul and Kristine Weatherby, are requesting a variance from the 30 foot rear
yard setback for the construction of a deck on property zoned RSF and located at 135 Choctaw
Circle.
What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the
developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the
meeting, the Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps'
1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.
2. The Developer will present plans on the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project.
Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City
Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to
someone about this project, please contact Cindy at 937-1900 ext. '117. If you choose to
submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting.
Staff will provide copies to the Commission.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on November 18, 1999.
Z
~Z
~Z~
113
LU
~OT
W
Z
SO
O0-r'
~x~
w
0 T
~ m
_~0 7
~oz
mO~
0 T
Z
Z
LU LO
~;~:W
2ET
0o~
WW
I~Z
OwO~
~Z~
w,~w
..Al--CD
o<ruJ
~(.)
z
mrcz
TO~
zrrz
w
z
0
w
rD~9
W ~
~z ~
mwoz
~ ~Z
O~
z
w
0
Z
F-~
w
z
Orrz
~rrz
_2 <
z
,~rr'z
131 Choctaw Circle
Chanhassen MN 55317
November 22, 1999
Planning Commission
City Hall
690 City Center Drive
Chanhassen MN 55317
Re: Variance Request for Deck
Applicam: R. Paul & Kristine Weatherby, 135 Choctaw Circle
Dear Planmng Conunission Members:
We, Haflm~ and Margaret Swanson, residents of 131 Choctaw Circle and neighbors of the
Weatherbys, fully support their request for a variance from the 30 foot rear yard setback for
the construction of a deck on property zoned RSF and located at 135 Choctaw Circle.
Please give fl~em the utmost consideration on the requested variance. Tlmnk you.
Yours truly,
Mar~ret Sx{'ankon
Harlan Swanson
CC: Mr. and Mrs. Paul Weatherby
ROBERT E. L. LENNIE
6811 BRULE CIRCLE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
Planning Commission
City of Chanhassen
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
1999
11/23/99
RE: Weatherby Deck Plan - 135 Choctaw Circle
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
I am a resident of the Lotus Lake subdivision of which the above home is located.
I have reviewed the plans for the deck the family wished to build and believe it will
enhance their property and thus, our neighborhood.
I xvould encourage allowing this deck to replace the existing structure and approve the
plan as presented.
Robert E. L. Lennie
The Weatherby Family
135 Choctaw Circle