PC Staff Report 8-18-09
PC DATE: August 18,2009
IT]
CC DATE: August 24,2009
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
REVIEW DEADLINE:
CASE #: 09-10
BY: AF, RG, ML, JM
PROPOSED MOTION:
"The Chanhassen Planning Commission as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals approves the
IS-foot front yard setback variance to permit a IS-foot front yard setback on Lot 9, Block 1,
Pinehurst Second Addition, based on the attached Findings of Fact and subject to conditions 1 - 6
on page 5 of the staff report."
Approval requires an affirmative vote of three-fourths of the members present.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a IS-foot front yard setback variance.
LOCATION: 6604 Alder Way ,,"--
Lot 9, Block 1, Pinehurst 2nd Addition ~
APPLICANT:
Synergy Land Company
P. O. Box 470
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(612) 590-0811
Brent.hislop@synergylandcompany.com
Brent & Karen Hislop
810 Overlook Lane
Victoria, MN 55386
PRESENT ZONING: Single-Family Residential District, RSF
2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential- Low Density (net density 1.2 - 4.0 units per acre)
ACREAGE: 0.63 acres
DENSITY: NA
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING:
The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the
proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a
relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation
from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting a IS-foot front yard setback variance from the required 30-foot front
yard setback requirement in order to construct a house on the house pad illustrated with the
grading plan for the subdivision.
To the north, the property is zoned 01, and contains the Minnetonka West Middle School playfield.
To the south and east, the properties are zoned RSF and contain single-family homes within the
development. The property to the west is also zoned and contains permanent open space owned by
the City.
c
.~
......
......
'"d
'"d
<r::
"0
:::
C"l
......
rJJ
l-<
;:::l
...l::
<l)
c
0::
.-
~
u
o
@
O\~
......
o
.....:l
Hislop Variance
Planning Case 09-10
August 18, 2009
Page 2 of5
Water and sewer service was provided to the site with the subdivision of the property. Access is via
Alder Way, a private street at the end of Pinehurst Drive. The site was graded in conjunction with
the development of the subdivision creating a building pad area in the northern portion of the
property. The southern half of the property is wooded. To the west in the City-owned property is a
wetland complex and drainage gully.
APPLICABLE REGUATIONS
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances
Chapter 20, Article XII, "RSF" Single-Family Residential District, section 20-615, Lot
Requirements and Setbacks
BACKGROUND
On February 27,2006, the Chanhassen City
Council approved the preliminary and final plat
creating 41 lots and one outlot with variances for
the use of two private streets, replatting the
Pinehurst subdivision into Pinehurst 2nd Addition
with two fewer lots.
On March 14, 2005, the Chanhassen City
Council approved the final plat for Pinehurst
Addition creating 43 lots, 2 outlots and
associated right-of-way for public streets.
On January 10, 2005, the Chanhassen City
Council approved the rezoning ofthe 27.62
acres located within the Pinehurst subdivision
from Rural Residential (RR) to Single-Family
Residential (RSF); and the preliminary plat for
Pinehurst Addition with a variance for the use
of private streets.
{.~,
.'V,::~ ^' 870'2'20. W \: ./
"".~,~ ~~:::;. ~?7., ;! '~< '
(~.'"'T'(''' '/-'-;.{: -'~"'. ...,;'__,."""'.!"2.'-.
9it<~'~::~i~;:
,/"1 ,'" ~.' 10 4.~";'1"/,/~~;',/ 'J. ..ft>"
,j;>""" '<~':;;(~~!< .~,;~';:2:':i:',j:':'}L~~i
.;- (1/1 ../ ~ /,/ I.J~."',~~ A'- ?> lrl
,l:~~t,i;';? / ~:f;?;Y/~;~<~;:
. ;"-"~' '~" .......... '" "; /,. ",",.,~.,.".,,~r ../..:....'/_....\.:~.......~....~t.~.O_
~ ./ .~~(',,:.;~~.j;~,.~ ..~~).,i'/..l ,"r.-_"'",' ,.;,y /'._' .::
1,-. ~"'~ ,".>',..'.-. rS'.~~ "-I I 12.
/~i ,~- ..,,:~~~~.~7:~,..~~~ .~A;;~{ ,i}'~':-'/
~,/ ~/;;~:' ~~" ..... '!? I.~ p ,..:..-.-; '"
.~ q, Ii .~;....'../'.:._,;.,~\ .
.";: ;;' '"', ....; ;/ . /..,
_.. _1- . __.
{;,
J
....
'.,
The easterly 13.5 acres ofthe property was subdivided into two lots as part ofthe Old Slocum Tree
Farm Addition on April 6, 1987, with lot areas of 4 and 9.5 acres, respectively. The rear 14.12 acres
were required to be attached to Lot 2, Block 1, Old Slocum Tree Farm as a condition of the plat
approval. At that time, the property was zoned RIa, Agricultural Residence.
Hislop Variance
Planning Case 09-10
August 18, 2009
Page 3 of5
ANAL YSIS
The applicant is requesting relief from the front setback
requirement to permit the construction of a single-family home.
The proposed house placement continues the line of the building
fronts as established during the platting process. Due to the angle
of the lot relative to the northern property line, the western side of
the property would place the house at the 15- foot setback while the
eastern side of the property is approximately 70 feet back from the
property line. In order to assure that this building line is
maintained, staff is recommending a condition that would not
permit the construction of any building within the northeast corner
of the site.
LOT SKETCH
/
,/
I
I
I
I
PLO WSHARES. we.
WLa
In conjunction with the platting of the property, the City identified a 30-foot front yard setback
within the compliance table. However, in the discussion of the private street, the City specified a
minimum 20-foot setback from the private street. The intent was to assure a minimum setback
for those properties which had the private street within their property lines, since the Code does
not specify any required setbacks from private streets. The applicant assumed that the 20-foot
private street setback negated the 30-foot front yard setback. Furthermore, the grading plan
continued a rectangular building pad that came within 15 feet of the northern property line in the
northwest corner of the lot. This grading plan was utilized in the preliminary site grading for the
property.
Due to the enhanced environmental protection resulting from the granting of the variance, staff is
recommending approval of the 15- foot front yard setback variance.
WETLANDS
There is one jurisdictional wetland on the adjoining property to the west. This wetland does not
impinge upon the property but the setback does extend onto the property. This wetland is a seep
type of wetland and a considerable amount of erosion has formed within the watershed of this
wetland. Care should be taken in the design and construction of any structure on the property to
avoid increasing the volume of water directed to this area and to avoid increasing rate of flow to
this area. In the event that sump pumps are installed with the construction of this house, they
should be "soft" connected to the 4-inch drain tile located at the back-of-curb for the private cul-
de-sac.
The farther the structure can be placed from this area, the less likely that drainage from the roof
area and drive areas will adversely affect the gully that is forming.
Hislop Variance
Planning Case 09-10
August 18, 2009
Page 4 of5
LAKES AND BLUFFS
The proposed project is not within any
shoreland district. There are no bluff zones
located on the property. However, there are
areas west and southeast of the property
that have slopes as steep as 40%. These are
not considered bluff as they do not have the
minimum rise of 25 feet. The soils
throughout this area are considered highly
erodible by the NRCS and care should be
taken to avoid activities which could
accelerate the erosion of the existing gully
or create new nick points and gullies. This
includes not increasing the volume or rate
of runoff directed to the east; attempting to
increase the travel time of runoff prior to
discharging off property; connecting any future drain tile to the existing drain tile at the back-of-
curb; maintaining a vegetative buffer; and using other recognized best management practices.
As with wetland setbacks, the variance request for the front yard setback increases the distance
between new hardcover and the highly erodible slope areas.
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
Because of the proximity to the wetland and the presence of highly erodible slopes when a
building plan is submitted for this property, a detailed erosion and sediment control plan will be
required as part of the submittal packet.
TREE PRESERVATION
Allowing the pad site to be located closer to the north property line would assist in preserving the
wooded area located on the southern half of the lot. The lot was cleared with a building area that
assumed the reduced setback. Requiring the standard 30-foot setback would necessitate
additional clearing on the lot.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion and adoption of the
attached findings of fact and recommendation:
"The Chanhassen Planning Commission as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals approves the
15- foot front yard setback variance to permit a 15- foot front yard setback on Lot 9, Block 1,
Pinehurst 2nd Addition, based on the attached findings of fact and subject to the following
conditions:
Hislop Variance
Planning Case 09-10
August 18, 2009
Page 5 of5
1. Future construction plans shall take the wetland and gully features into consideration and
utilize best management practices to avoid further degradation to the wetland and gully.
2. In the event that sump pumps are installed with the construction of this house, they should be
"soft" connected to the 4-inch drain tile located at the back-of-curb for the private cul-de-sac.
3. When a building plan is submitted for this property, a detailed erosion and sediment control
plan will be required as part of the submittal.
4. Additional address numbers will be required at the driveway entrance. Color ofletters must
be on a contrasting background color, 6 inches in height and adjacent to the driveway. If
landscaping is to be done near the numbers, consideration shall be given that growth of
plant/scrubs will not block the view of the numbers over time.
5. The building shall continue the orientation and placement of the buildings located to the east
of the site. Buildings shall not be placed within the northeast front triangle of the site,
represented on the south by a continuation of the private street easement line to the
northwest.
6. Structures shall not encroach into any easements except for the driveway connecting to the
private street access."
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings of Fact and Action.
2. Development Review Application.
3. Applicant's Narrative Dated July 8,2009.
4. Pinehurst Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan Dated 01105/06.
g:\plan\2009 planning cases\09-1O hislop setback variance\staff report hislop.doc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND ACTION
IN RE: Application of Brent and Karen Hislop for a 15- foot front yard setback variance -
Planning Case No. 09-10.
On August 18,2009, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled
meeting to consider the application of Brent and Karen Hislop for a 15- foot front yard setback
variance from the 30-foot setback requirement at 6604 Alder Way, located in the Single Family
Residential District (RSF).
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance that was
preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all
interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Single-Family Residential (RSF).
2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential-Low Density (1.2 - 4 units per
acre).
3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 9, Block 1, Pinehurst 2nd Addition.
4. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not
grant a variance unless they find the following facts:
a. 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 setback requirement would cause an undue
hardship. The house location would be forced further south into the wooded area that the
City is trying to preserve. The house would also be pushed out of the building orientation
and alignment being maintained by the rest ofthe houses along this private street.
b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to
other property within the same zoning classification.
1
Finding: Due to the angle of the lot relative to the northern property line, the proposed
building pad encroaches into the setback on the western side of the property but
maintains an approximately 70-foot setback on the east side of the property.
c. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income
potential of the parcel ofland.
Finding: The proposed variance allows the house to maintain the building orientation and
alignment being maintained by the rest of the houses along this road. Additional tree
preservation and surface water benefits can be achieved through the granting of the variance.
d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship.
Finding: The difficulty is due to the angle of the lot relative to the northern property line.
e. 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 proposed variance allows the house to maintain the building orientation and
alignment of the houses along this private street and provides additional tree preservation
and surface water benefits.
f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply oflight 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 oflight 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.
The planning report #09-10, dated August 18, 2009, prepared by Robert Generous, et aI, is
incorporated herein.
CONCLUSION
The Planning Commission has determined that the granting of the variance is in conformance with
the spirit and intent of the City Code and Comprehensive Plan.
2
ACTION
"The Planning Commission as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals approves a IS-foot front
yard setback variance, Planning Case #09-10, for the construction of a single-family home on
property legally described as Lot 9, Block 3, Pinehurst 2nd Addition, based on these findings of
fact. "
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on this 18th day of August, 2009.
CHANHASSEN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
BY:
Its Chair
3
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard - P.O, Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100
Planning Case No. 0 q -I 0
/
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVED '
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
JUN 0 9 2009
CHANHASSEN PLANNING OiPT
PLEASE PRINT
Applicant Name and Address:
S I ~fi:;(1..k;) Y l- A. C\l b c..,W\ pA.~'{'
?D. '-g~ i./70
t:."'A-~kA.SS€:'N ,WIN 553/7
Contact: '"B~'T' Hl S c.."f ~
Phone: lol~'S9o'0e,'1 Fax: 4v-
Email: b-r<.V\-\-....-\:$lefa~Y~-f.II."..d.tICL~c.6.mp(W\Y .
Owner Name and Address:
131Z€:~T .-.. kAttE-N
B\D ~lr1)~
Vl~jA ~N
ontact:
Phone:
Email:
ldlSwf'
LN.
:;53 BLt
Fax:
NOTE: Consultation with City staff is reauired prior to submittal, including review of development
plans
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Temporary Sales Permit
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements (V AC)
Interim Use Permit (IUP)
X Variance (VAR) ~b
Non-conforming Use Permit
Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)
Planned Unit Development*
Zoning Appeal
Rezoning
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Sign Permits
Sign Plan Review
x
Notification Sign - $200
(City to install and remove)
Site Plan Review (SPR)*
x ~s w for F,ili.og Fee~ey Cost**
- $5 UP/SPRNA~AP/Metes & Bounds
- 450 Minor SUB
TOTALFEE$ tf-5()~ C~ SlIt
Subdivision*
An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant
prior to the public hearing.
*Sixteen (16) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8%" X 11"
reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a diQital COpy in TIFF-Group 4 (*.tif) format.
**Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract.
Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews.
NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for
each application. .
SCANNED
PROJECT NAME: ? i t..)E; \-\v~s."f ;Z ~ Ao.bl noN
LOCATION: /'I..."'E. o-P /-PkE Lvc/{ ~b J4-NA
LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PID: LOT 9 ~t.-CJd( I
,.
~A'-PIN 73t.-vb,
7?-/J€;(Vr?4r ;2 'fl> ,4M;77~
TOTAL ACREAGE:
7tD
. iJJ3 ~c- .
2.SLP It 009 D
WETLANDS PRESENT:
YES
x
NO
PRESENT ZONING:
.-g ~ t; I l)E;f.;) '11 6. L.. <; , f' .
12-E ~ d>C7'-I T I tK.. (}.. ~.
REQUESTED ZONING:
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION:
7Z€SI bclUru+L
<;;..~.
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION:
US / 6&/V T lilt '-
5:.F.
JI,.! IAfClsNSISTlS-NC-Y Ex.rSr$ /l'U tilE:' Pl..4N.S/APPlUVe))
I
l)oeV;'I1l!;/<JT) t:iS/'Z. rIfE. At\J1E.I'fvff!.ST 2~ Ilb!:>t-rurlU (Af-f'rz.6/lc.b iN ZooS-/ZOO/D ')
IHE 1ZSOvE;S T ~6(2.. V/41!..lI1'IUCE; "5 &a.uE-S' -"'0 ~LAfl,II::1 rJ./A7 14 IS"' seT~
j:'/l41I1 rH€ AJtstLr~N -P/U>(JeIJ-'Y i'Al€. (liS Sl--flTWrJ tS'N ApP/U)'j)E.b "Pt..ANS) IS
Tile (!.D(I..Ileq *IU~ If\JT&J~A SEr8AC-k.t:dte. 771IS LorLINf: . c;L-EASE st:G Arrlk.l/-ePJ
AI/A-
I
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.
REASON FOR REQUEST:
FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW: Include number of existing employees:
and new employees:
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written
notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 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.
1{tJ
/D e
7/ r"l
/ ate
Rev. 1/08
SCANNED
S"\TUergy Land Compal1
'J ~ - ~l('
I Working together. Developing value.T" ,
To:
Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director
Members of the Chanhassen Planning Commission
Date: 7/08/09
From: Brent & Karen Hislop
Synergy Land Company, LLC
Chanhassen. MN
brent.hislop@SYllergyLandCompanv.com
(612) 590-08] ]
RE: Approved Setbacks for Lot 9, Blk. 1, Pinehurst 2nd Addition (6604 Alder Way)
Thank you for our recent discussion and your site visit related to our lot at Pinehurst. Per our talk, we originally
purchased this lot in December 2007 and have been actively marketing the property for sale over the past 18
months.
Purpose ofthe Variance:
The necessity of this variance is primarily administrative in nature. The lot (as part ofthe Pinehurst subdivision)
received plat approvals from the Chanhassen City Council in 2005/2006. The subdivision approval included a
variance for the use of a private drive to serve the 3 lots on Alder Way. The approved resolution and plans require
a 20' "front yard" setback from the private drive of all 3 lots. This issue is relevant, but not in question.
The specific question relates to a "compliance chart" notation suggesting that a 30' frOl~t yard setback is required
for each of the lots. For the adjoining lots (lot to & 11) this 30' setback was reduced to 20' as part of the approved
private drive variance. For Lot 9, the chart specifies the "front yard" as the northern property line which is opposite
of the area from which this lot gains access to the private drive. Due to this classification, an inconsistency exists
between the compliance chart requiring a 30' setback and the approved plans and documents which demonstrate a
15' setback to the northern property line.
The traditional purpose of a front yard setback is to ensure that homes within a community are placed a reasonable
distance from the street to achieve safe and attractive streetscapes. We believe there was "clear and obvious" intent
by the City Council to approve this lot with the 15' northern setback and a 20' private drive setback. This is
consistent with abutting lots and the approved plans. We request the City clarify this inconsistency in the approval
documents by approving the requested variance.
Background:
Recently, we've discussed the sale of the lotto a qualified buyer interested in building a large custom-built rambler
with a walkout basement. The buyer's builder representative called the City to discuss restrictions, permitting, etc.
in advance of a final lot sale negotiation with the buyer. During this discussion, the City suggested that the
approved project plans and lot sketch demonstrated an error in the <<front" setback line.
SCANNED
s~nergy Land Compal1
, J tJ?tc
Working together. Developittg value.'"
You & I have discussed and agreed to the "non-typical" character of this lot which is located "on" a private drive
but does not have direct frontage on this private drive - it is accessed via an easement agreement through lot 10
which is located to the south of our lot 9. The lot is 27,000+ sq. ft. in size and roughly 100' wide and 270' deep.
Given the unique character & shape of the lot, it does not have a "typical" front of the lot. The existing City
approved plans demonstrate a 20' building setback from the private drive which is consistent with the other lots
located on the Alder Way.
Issue to Clarify:
The issue in question relates to possible conflicting approval notes demonstrating a 15' vs. a 30' setback from the
northern property boundary which abuts the Minnetonka Middle School West. This property line is physically
separated by a 10' change in elevation and a wooded tree line.
Upon learning ()fthe issue, the builder and buyer notified me of the City's comments and suggested serious
concerns related to the lot value and house fit if the lot is further restricted by a 30' setback vs. the IS' setback as
shown on the approved grading plan, landscape plan, and lot fit survey.
It's important to note that regardless of the specific plans currently being reviewed by this active buyer, we
purchased the lot with the understanding that the northern property line had a 15' setback and agree with the
buyerlbuilder that a change to a 30' setback has material negative impacts to the lot's value and home design
flexibility .
The issue is NOT as a discussion of whether we "can we make this buyer's plan fif' but rather, "how do we ensure
the lot's northern boundary maintains a IS' setback as drawn on the approved plans".
Interpretation of the Issue:
After review ofthe plans and project approval documents, it is our belief that the lot is currently approved with a
IS' building setback on the northern property line and this approval is consistent with the attached lot sketch survey
noting the easement lines and setback lines. This lot sketch survey is consistent with the approved grading plan and
other approved plans.
We do not dispute that the "compliance chart" in the staff memorandum (dated 3.14.05) suggests a 30' "front"
setback for the lot; however, we believe this to be an unintended typographical error. The approval notes,
resolution, and all approved plans suggest that the 15' setback was the intended approved setback along this
property line.
Furthermore, in reviewing the "compliance chart", it calls for a 30' front setback for the other lots fronting on the
private drive (lots 10 & 11). On the same page it is noted that aU lots fronting on the private drive were approved
with a 20' setback.
SCANNED
S'\1Uergy Land C01l1pa.ll
, J _ _.. .-:- ~{'
Ih Working together. Developing value!" .
The above being true, the issue boils down to whether is lot is subject to a "front" setback and if so, what is the
appropriate and logical setback from the front of the lot. We've agreed with the City that this lot is truly unique in
its size, shape, and wooded character. We believe that this lot does not fall neatly into typical zoning standards for
the following reasons:
. The lot is accessed via a private drive
. The lot does not "fronf' onto the private drive, but accessed via an easement from lot 10.
. The lot's size, location, woodlands, wetland buffer, shape is unique.
. The lot meets tbe typical 20' setback from the private drive (similar to lots 10 & 11). The variance
approving the private drive over-rides the ''front yard setback" issue and therefore justifies that the northern
property line need not be considered tbe ''fronf'.
. The clear and obvious intent of the approved plans (i.e. grading, etc.) show a 15' northern setback.
Approved Plans:
As part of the conditions related to the private drive and the benefits which justified approval of the private drive,
we believe this lot is not subject to a ''front setback" line. Any typical "front" setback requirement was eliminated
as part of the approved variance related to the private drive and instead was intentionally approved with a 15'
northern property setback and a 20' setback from the private drive (the lot is also restricted by the wetland buffer
per the approved plans).
These sebacks exceed the 20' front, 10' side yard setbacks which govern the 2 other lots located on tbis private
drive. This lot should not be further burdened beyond the criteria of the neighboring lots.
We believe there was "clear and obvious" intent by the City Council to approve the lot with the 15' northern
setback and a 20' private drive setback.
. Final Plat Staff Memo (Page 7 of 17) "Setbacks shall be a minimum of 20 feet from the back of the
private street. *This condition shall be modified as follows: Setbacks on Lots 9, 10, 11, 14, 15 and 16,
Block I shall be a minimum of20 feet from the back of the private street."
The staff memo and staff report (based on a review of the submitted drawings) makes no mention of this lot
being out of compliance. There really is no ''fronf' of the lot for this parcel, because there is no ROW
frontage.
. Preliminary and Final Plat Staff Report
"Final Plat Approval RECOMMENDA nON: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following
motion: "The Chanhassen City Council approves the Final Plat for Pinehurst Addition creating 43 lots, 2
outlots and associated right-of-way for public streets (plans prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc.)
subjecttothe following conditions: 1. Setbacks on Lots 9, 10, 11, 14, 15 and 16, Block Ishall be a
minimum of 20 feet from the back of the private street."
SCANNED
S"\T1\ergy Land Compilll
'J __ m .~ ~lC
!J Working together. Developing vallle.T'.I,
. Development Contract
Page SP-l of the development agreement indicates that plans shall be prepared in accordance with plans listed
(A-D). As we have discussed, all of the plans are consistent in showing a 10' setback on the preliminary plans.
changing to a 15' north setback to match the drainage and utility easement. If a 30' setback was intended, the
change would have been to change the 10' to the 30' setback at this time. Clearly this issue and setback line
was review and intentionally approved at 15'.
Page SP-3 of the development agreement, item 8-C, again notes that the front setback shall be 20' from the
back of the private street.
Our Request:
We request the City provide us written confirmation that for the above reasons, the lot is currently approved with a
20' setback from the private drive and a 15' setback from the northern property line - consistent with the attached
Lot Sketch Survey.
Summary:
Kate - We appreciate your timely review and thank you for your willingness to work with us to clarify this issue as
noted above. I'm glad to meet with you to discuss your questions or thoughts. Once we've talked, I'll
communicate the update to our potential buyerlbuilder.
Best Regards, / J
- ,e(t!:; ~'/ )
C'A,rp~ / .,"""'\ /'/
Brent Hislop '. _ / . .....
Synergy Land Company, LLC ~-_.
(612) 590-0811
brent.hislop@SynergyLandCompany.com
Documents Below:
1. Lot Sketch Survey
2. GradinglLS Plan
3. Arial of Plat
SCANNED
N87<>>12'20.W
123.49
" I ,-,-, " -,- A
, " , , I I " I'
"'.... ,.... , L_ ,...., ,-.
..
Lot For Sale: _
, " -,- ;tf,4
, I I " , ,
L_ ,.., I , ,
, ",-
I " I
L_ ''''' ,
"--
"--
"--
"--
~ "
~~
/
/
)~
"1
/
"-- /
"--<
/'
/'
/'
/'
/
/
/
/
"
REQUESTED BY:
PLOWSHARES, INC.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot 9, Block 1, PINEHURST 2ND ADDITION.
according to the recorded plot thereof,
Carver County, Minnesota.
".
---....
==-.=..
-~
- --
nlIL~ ___
..-ad
.-
SCANNED
Print Data/Map
Page 1 of 1
PID# 256110090
~ A !<'" ,"'I ,,,/'7.f~ ~~;,'
;; '"
.......
~
Legend
Carver R03d$
US~
~ UNIf>;!nr>rt
CSAH Rom
COIr.lIyR03!o
;./ T""""'1>R03!o
;./ CiyRcm
;./ Prim 103!0
Lakes
Parcels
Color 2008
\Parcel Illformation
Property Address;.
6604 ALDER WAY
CHANHASSEN , MN
Taxpayer Infonnation:
BRENT & KAREN HISLOP
810 OVERLOOK LN
VICTORIA, MN 55386
!Parcel Properties
G IS Acres: 0.62983814
Homestead: N
School District: 0276
IParcel Locatioll
Section: 03
Township: 116
Range: 023
IPayable Year 2010
Map Created: 7-8-2009
Est. Market Value Land: $242800
Est. Market Value Building: $0
Est. Market Value Total: $242800
Plat Information:
PINEHURST 2ND ADDITION
Lot-009 B1ock-OO t
IlLast Sale Illformation
Sale Date: 12/14/2007
Sale Price: $267309
QualifiedlUnqualified: QUALIFIED SALE
CARVER COUNTY GIS DISCLAIMER: This map was created using Carver County's Geographic Information Systems (GIS), it is a compilation 114
of information and data from various City, County, State, and Federal offices. This map is not a surveyed or legally recorded map and is intended to be ~
used as a reference. Carver County is not responsible for any inaccuracies contained herein.-
http://carvergiswebl.co.carver.mn.us/arcims/gis/public/parcel- searchlprintdatamap.asp?PID... 7/8/2009
SCANNED
Print Data/Map
Page 1 of 1
PID# 256110090
,f~, '!.. ;:~ ."0' ~
."J,,,,- J
:::'-1-"
-
!(""~"{;~"""" ) '~.,
I
Legend
Carver Roa~
USIf~
" MH~1
/I CSAIl~
Co:miy Re%!s
Iparcel Illformation
Property Address:
6604 ALDER WAY
CHANHASSEN , MN
Taxpayer Information:
BRENT & KAREN HISLOP
810 OVERLOOK LN
VICTORIA, MN 55386
Paltllls
Color 2008
IParcel Properties
GIS Acres: 0,62983814
Homestclld: N
School District: 0276
IParcel Locatioll
Section: 03
Township: 116
Range: 023
IPayable Year 2010
tI T..""""Rom
tI CtyRom
tI ~.R_
ubs
Map Created: 7-8-2009
Est. Market Value Land: $242800
Est. Markct Value Building: $0
Est. Market Value Total: $242800
Plat Information:
PINEHURST 2ND ADDITION
Lot-009 Block-ool
IILast Sale Illformatioll
Sale Date: 12/14/2007
Sale Price: $267309
QualifiedlUnqualified: QUALIFIED SALE
CARVER COUNTY GIS DISCLAIMER: This map was created using Carver County's Geographic Information Systems (GIS), it is a compilation C
of information and data from various City. County, State. and Federal offices. This map is not a surveyed or legally recorded map and is intended to be
used as a reference. Carver County is not responsible for any inaccuracies contained herein.
hup:llcarvergisweb 1.co.carver.mn.us/arcims/gis/public/parcel_ searchlprintdatamap.asp?PID... 7/812009
SCANNED
-----
==----.:::=-~ -_:~-== -..-_--
- . ,--_. ---~.::_-
'Y.;'$.:~
:\~
--'
- - ::::.--- r-
- -:::.. -:::- -:::. ~ .,-.
i~ ,//.- /'".~
I ../a ../'- ...
~-" ,lor
L' f~~~1T-. rTlJllllTl.... .'
~..ULw....~~ ~~"'(J
{;~~&ffOO~~
~
{.~.A..,. , f.. a..
----,- - ....
SCANNED
~ ~ ~ z l1
.. (,1 ll:! Ie t; ~ -,/, 8 ~ ~ ~
~ '" ~ 11 ~" !l z
h ~i1 ~ ~ I~~ ~ ~S ~ ~.~ ~;r;
.i d ~ 11 b"'z ~ l!!d ~ Ii; i lol
i ~!! ; ; g:~~ ~ Ii ~ i ! ~ ;r; ~
!I il:"~' ~ il 5d~ ~ tl~8 e in Ill' i
~8!! ~ i ~l!!.~~~ iU! i.. ~;i~
~ ~ ii~i to glllol i ~ ~ ; ~~ j
~ ~ l!!~~5 i I!l; t ~ ~ ~ ~ to li
~I~ t;~ g ~ ~~~~i ~ llol:h
Cll>le:. Ij! l1~ ~ ~al!!~~ ~ ~ ;!iil'll!
fi~~ I! ~!I~~~ ~ ~ iii~"
~o [:i:! "~ lihz ~~H j eU
~~~~ hillih~H~I;is
~~:I1i~:m Ii B~d ~Bli S! ~!~ ~
;!~ il" l!!~d l!!!< ;!ddh ;!id We>;!
~ ~ :~~ ;r; l!!~~~. ~ a ih ~ ~ ~ ~ foil ~
~ ~ !<(!: ~ " i tl;~2 ~ : : ~ l! i~ ~ ~ ~ J ~
lol .. ~lol~ !lEI - j!!~i!~ ~~~ il a ~ !!;~~ ~ Il~ ~:
;J ~ ~i ~ i ~ ;Ii!;: bli Ii e = li is ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q
~II!; I =~g~ll~ d;,,~~ ~h ~ ~ ~ m~~ ~ tl~ q Ii fS
~~di;! i;!~i~ ;I~II~ ~h S ~ ~ ;Il!!. ~ ;i . Ii E~ i J J
~ ; z~~ ~;!I ~o I ;~9 ~ I 5~ ii~:i 8 ~n ~ s S ~t ~h
~ ~ 18~ hI'! ~~ ~ :I~ ~ ~~ bS ~~!l1i b ~;~hl ~~ ~i f'li
I i i~HU ;~ !lol! I ;n~ B~:II~! I~!~~n Bi~ii ;1;
g~~?i~~=lillij ih~~~~~ Fg~l1~g lht~hulil:lhulil5~lil
!i! m n! ;; ~i:Si~i! ~~ !;;!~ h ;uun; un;~ n I
Z5~!l~g~ fd~~ u~~illii~! h~l!l! ~~~~u ~~ '.111 ~ ~
~uh~,g h~u~ j~~i;!he ;g;!~;~hih~ :e~ ~ II ii n ~ s W (
. . ..... ..... . .. ,," B .1 \ \ ~ ! Illi.l
....
~' J
i
.ei
Il4
u
~
...;-
s:;
III
. Ei liB
~J
GJsj
t ~(
O~~
xu
1
JlP-c
I
lJJi
~
~
l!
f I
I JII
:e III
~
~
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDA VIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on
August 6, 2009, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public
Hearing for the Hislop Variance Request - Planning Case 09-10 to the persons named on
attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner,
and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage
fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such
by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate
records.
S~bscribed and s'j;om to before me
thIS It,+V\ day of til ~U5\+ , 2009.
I
KIM T. MEUWISSEN j
Notary Public~Minnesota
My Commission Expires Jan 31, 2010
0')
c
':;:i
CD
CD
:!i:
0')5
c.-
-- 0
I.. 0
CO--
CD E
J:E
.2 0
:EO
::::JO')
a.c
--
-c
o c
CD CO
(,)-
':;:ia.
o c
ZCD
o
o
CO
.r:.
c
CO
.r:.
o
0')
c
':;:i
CD
CD
:!i:
c
0')0
C--
-L: ~
CO--
CD E
~E
._ 0
-0
.c
::::JO')
a.C
-C
o c
CD CO
(,)-
._ a.
...
o c
ZCD
o
o
CO
.r:.
c
CO
.r:.
o
"OQ)
Q)0.c (/)
-:::0- Q)
_-t"O (/)
~ 0 ell (/)
o.o~ ~ ~
.o.c_ 0 (/)
ell 0= Q) '5
~ .a;:s: .0' ~
o c .~ a. ~ 6
>. Q) ell "0 .0' .00
E.c.c Q)....
CIi .... - 0 (/) a. .!:!2
.~ 0 E Q) 0 Q) .S:2 E
'0 C o.c (/) o..c .0 E
c .- .... - a. 0 - ~ 0
III 0:: 0)$ a.C 0.0
-.- - ~ c(/)o Q)
c :5 .!:!2 a. +:: 0> Q) (/).c Q)
g '0 o.~ Q) .~ -::: c - -:::
'5 ccQ):s:-~E"O
"0 ~ .C .- E 0 0 a. 0 c
<('Ui ~~ Q)'5 :S:c'::: ell
-g 1I).c 0 -::: _ .~ Q) -g "0
C\J ~ .S:2 0 0> Q) C: ~ .> ~
(j)>--c.cQ)....a;o
.... II) .g "0 .C .c- 0> a. 0 U
~... c~ -Q)
.cll) a. ell 0 oc=.... (/)
Q):5(/)_ ~ell:S:Q).-
Cc:.c(/).O _....0>
l!)Q)C O:o-Q)o.c~Cell.~
a: >. III - ~ Q) - .- ell (/) .... ~
.... en ell....:.- 0 0'".0' 0 0>.S:2 _ ell 0
ell -> Q)Q)....c-o..cQ)Q)
.... .- > ..l<: III (/) .... 0..- = Q) .c .
o E.Q Q; gE o_(/) (/) (ij:s: g-E 0 e
ell (/) "0 - C a. - .- Q) - E =
"t)LL5:-l!lo....ai.c.ccuQ) .oQ)
Q) Q) <C -:;::; ~ 0 :: 0 - .c 0 ~ .c
~-c-q-o>~o.=~=enl-O(L_
O'"cQ)OC5oQ)o.o.o
~ U5 m ~::::!.< ~ g-.g 6.,....: C\i M ...t
t::
<ll
1ii
"0
Q)
C
o
N
>.
t::
Q)
"00.
> 0
ma.
c
o
CD
E
i=
~
CD
....
cu
C
e
o
:;::
cu
u
o
..J
.;.:
'ii lij
~ g
a.
o
~ ct
o
...J
...J
>-e
t:o
CD:;::
a.cu
o u
... 0
Q...J
Ill",
e e
CD.-
a.....
a. CD
cu CD
J:~
....CD
cu,c
,c....
:5:-;
o >. CD
:!:: ~ ~ .~ :0 >-
(/) (/) 0 - cuCU
.S; .~ t::Q) (/) g = "0
Q) ~.o~gE1?~~
(/) Ooc::::t::- ,c
ellQ) >. a: E .- ell 0 CD I-
:= 5;0.-.0
0.. oC;>Q)(/)_CD
~ S E ~ E ~ .~ ~ ;
+:: .cOell.g-:::oE>e
Q)Q) Oo.c(/)OQ)"'O:;::
....Q)c _ ':::.oCD
E I (/) ell 0 >.:2.- cu CD
O>ell.c-o.>1Il E
Q) 0Q)0Q)00'-"O
-::: c 0...<:5 ~ 0 a.:S ! e
Q) ~ -6'>'0 Q)='" III 0
.... 0 I::!I .c c .- 0 : .-
E...,.....,Q)~OO:s:-CD:::
Q) Cti C: .0' 0 ~ Q) :::: t: :1:: .-
.0 Q)........o>ellOIllE
(/) Q) ~ a. Q) >. ell en a..o E
c ~ ~ .!:!2 g:= .c 2! CD 0
ello...c .0. >0
0.. c - .0 .... - 0= ;>
Q) .g E 5 - C') :; .~ cu t)
.c:s: C 0 ell;::'5.Q5ti CD.=
; (/) Q).g~r-:.. a; Q) CD'Oe
Q)o ~ Q) EC\J.c E~ alij
(/) Q) ell c Q) C\J .!:!2 Q) ... -Q.
o .~.c 0 I .c ...
-ecQ)~~:!::-C,cCD
c a. ~ E(/)O> en 15 .2 ~ ,c
ell(/) 0 -- (/) ....
",,- t:!(/)~ellcQ)(/)Oo
;> ';::-.(3 e Q) 0 .E- CD ....
~ 0.- '.8 Q) Q) E c e'"
o :s: c c E ell E'- 0
>'Q):S:~ Q).2 0-6 oC';:
:=-::: :s:-SC) 0.0 ell 0 0
~
1Il~
ee
o CD
:;::E
In E
:J 0
0(,)
o >. CD
"OQ) - .0 C :0>-
E~~ ~ i ;t::~ ~ ~~
~~j (/) Q) :~~cQ)_E1?~~
.o.c_ ~ ~ (/) ooc_....-.w,c
~ .~~ ~ ~ jo. ~a: Ec ~ ~Q) ; .o_CD J:
c: '- "e- t5 -= t5 ..,
g, Q) .(ij a. Q) 6 0 E -S ~ .E "0 .*- ~ :S
E.c.c "O~ ~ ~ C(/).o1?o CD
CIi .... - 0 Q) a. ..!:!2 Q5 :E 8 ell ~ - 0 E > e
(,) 0 E Q) .. (/) 0 E Q) 0 .cc (/) 0 Q) ... 0:;::
:;::;-o.c(/)OQ)= ....Q) - ':::.oCD
o .~ .... _ a. o..c .0 EE' (/) ell 0 >.:2.- cu CD
c - Q)O-~ O>ell.c-o.>1Il E
1Il0-0-....co.o Q) 0Q)0Q)00-"O
C':c -;;; 6..~ (/) a. 0 Q) 0 -::: 5 0...<:5 ~ 0 a.:S ! e
o - .- c Q5 0 Q) (/) .c Q) Q) W - @ 0 Q) - ... III 0
+::oO-Q)~-:::C--::: .... -0 .cc=O:-
'5 II) .~ c E :s: - ~ E "0 E.. :> Q) ~ 0 0 :s: - CD :::
"O~""~ oOo.oc Q)Cti....~o~Q)::::t::1::-
<C~~EQ)'5:s:-.:::ell .0 Q)........o>elloIllE
-g 5:.c 0 -::: - .~ g "0 "0 (/) ~ ~ a. ~ >. ell Ci5 a..o E
C\J~000>Q)>(/)Q)Q) aiell~..c!:!2Q)~~ .2!~0
-(/)>=-c.c....Q)Q)>(/) -o.o.c-.o_-~-;>O
II) .0 "0 .- - .... .a; 0 . '"" _
~"'~c~.c6o.ou .oE- C'):;ccu....
.cll)o.elloO> =Q) Q)Q) .gCti...._+::tige
Q):5(/)_ ~c~""$ -::::s:c.o-....~Q) _-
~c:.c(/)~eell_~o> Q)(/)Q)ell~r-:..Q)Q)CDOe
l!) c (LO-Q)o.cQ)cmc Q)~~Q)EC\J.cE,cI-~5
a: >. - ~ Q) - >... .- (/) '"' ... C\J (/) .... .w
.... en ell -.!!! 0 O'".~ ~.- ~~ (/) ~ ~ Q) .cW c Q) I .- Q) ... -Q.
>.... Q)e~o>~_wOO~ 0 C\J .c ...
->..l<:IIl(/)Q)....o.~=-o.Q)c.cQ).Q)-....cQ)'O>.l!):!::-C,cCD
o .... -o.ellE --0....
.QQ;OEo~(/)ell~o.Eoec .c (/)o>So~e:S
(/)"O-co.c-Q)_m = ell~oo~CticQ)(/)o
~ 5:-<cl!lR~ell-:::.c-Q)E.o :S:>'~(/)O Q)o-.O
I -- 0 _ 0 ell.c 0 ~ Q) :!:: 0 0 .... Q) E c E ... ....
c-q-o>~o.=~=enI-O(L-:::gO~-~c ellE~~
Q)=_O'"Q)cQ)oaoQ)o.o.o >'Q)""..l<:Q)oE>o-e-
~ "E .- .-.... CO ...J - .c 0..0 ~ ;> ~ .c 0"0 ...
l-~oa:enl!lCO_~l-ellello.....C\iM...t :=-::::s:_C) 0.0 ell 0 0
t::
<ll
1ii
"0
Q)
C
o
N
>.
t::
-d~
> 0
ma.
c
o
..l<:
o
o
...J
...J
III ..
CD e'"
CD.= ~
E a..... 1Il~
.;.: a. CD
i= e 'ii e >-e CUCD e e
0 III cu t:.2 J::: o CD
~ :;:: 0 .~ CD.... ....CD :;::E
CD cu a. a.cu cu,c In E
.... u 0 o u ,c.... :J 0
cu 0 ... ... 0 :5:-;
c ..J Q. ct Q...J 00
Q)
~ (1) CO g'<V (J) tu
.Q ~ ~~~ "2S m ~ ~~
1fi a .2 Q) 0. @ _ "E >."- a. C1> as .9
~(1)~ 1fi'~ctS ~o ctScg ~5 c~~
-~C1> ~C1>(J) ID 0<._ ID~ mooo
~;~ i>as ~a ~.~ ~ID ~.~~
"0 '- :g E ~ (ij ..... > 0.$ ~ "O"S: $ ~ ~
~ ~ c E ~ ~ ~ ~i' . : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g.~
~~2 o~~~~om~E- -0 ~_o
~rn ~~o~~~'~-oc 5- w-c
~,5B ~~~E~E~~(.)~ ~ ~~~
~ii ~~~~~~~~g~ ~~ ~~~
en ~ CJ) c .- - ~ <5 ~,- :::l ~ ~ (.) etS ~ 0 0
~on ~~sE~~~CJ)-ID ~> .u~
E=.~ C:=0!?3:(J)'0~5o:setS O>.ID
._~~ .Q3:D'->.etS~~E~ ~o c:~E
2a~ Cti1ij~~:g~~o-.~.E-ffi CJ)u~
BroID ~~m-o~E~~~ u.~ 8~c
"tJ~:5 0 _~~E-o.~~~ s~ ~-o
~'5~ ~.~~~~~~~~~ gs ~g~
-g-ci>E(j)-'~EID-3=Q)~ O(f) ct
~ ~ ~ C ID Q).2 '0 .:: E (ij u ~ - CO ~ 5 8.~
g~-~.~E~~~~~~ss mco u~s
~~8Q)i5&ctS~Q)~~~'~ ~~ ~Q)(f)
c: E 10 E 0..- Q) Ol 21 E'in U E.>t: 0 g. (3.s::::
OUCID=~~~~ctSQ)e (.) ~~ -~
u~~s~~~~~Q)~~~~ o~ ~.~~
~~'~'O~E.E~~~EQ)~o -'ffi ~i~
~ <( >. as -g 0 U (.) >. (.) ,g ~ 0..:2 -g ~ g>"O a...
'~mi~TIO~~~~S-E5 ~m ~~~
~ "8 g. 0 .~ g> ~ 5.= ~ as g 8 -t5 ~ ~ m .~ =
cU~-~'~oQ)gCJ)E~.=en 8~ ~ID~
~~~j:5~2:55~~.~~~ci>~~ ~~E
~::~.~a...~~oiQ)o..s~~,~; &~g
~E,=~~!3:B~~~~Q)~~Q)o Q)~~
wm~.-.2-E(.)BCf)Q)=:::lQ)E~B ~~~
~EQ)~c..<Q)~Q)g>enctS'O:5=ctS~ -roID
Eu~i~.~3=~~:::len~~(.)E~ ~g-
Q)a5~n2~~~~2~.~.Q~~m~.<5&~
[Egi~~~~~Q)~~~28~~~~ctSO
~~ro-Err'$g~uQ)g€>.~c~oQ)Q)
Q)c.~i:::l~cE~ ,c~~ ~~Q)O~~~
it; ~ E Q; en >-~ E 0 5 ctS ~ ~ ~ () '=:5 ~ .~ C) ~
o~oEQ)~~oo~8~Q)~Q)o~Q)E.5-
_ <D >...- :5 Q) co>' etS C .,.... E c ~ e? ~ a. E U C
'22:>"c~Q)Q)~~~~ ro~m~uo~'-
.. ~ ~() ~ o~ E~O Q) O!?c55;:.g g.1i5'* 0 ~~
~uQ)~ t'~E~!E~:::l ,B~jIDQ)~~-g
~~j.~~8.~8~~~~NE~~KE~~~~
~ia.Cf)~~Q)~~-(.)iw~o~Cf)g~cc.~
g~E'~'~ctS~etSgg~~!?c~Q)uu>..~~Q)
OE enCf)U~~Cf)Q)ctSctSc~OQ)Ca...c~
~~Uo~~tc~etS~_~~'-~B~etSQ)os
:: 5 ufU c ~8.~ g>~.Q'g ctS.~~'O (; 5:2:5 g.
~:~~~~~~o~~'~5~s~~~8~m~~
~~g'E~~~~~EEO~~5~~i~i8(j)
~~NCa.~Q) oE>'c2~_Q) '-o~E
~~&~~~~s~~85~~~~~*K~~g
u .
~ -a m ~
'_~ ~ ~~t ~~ S ~ n~
ctS 0 ,Q ID ~ i:: C >.'- 8. (]) ~ g
CBQ)'U ~'~ctS 0::0 ctSsg.2:5 C:~~
~:5(]) -gQ>CI) 2 g.......:o Q)~ Q).~o
<(m~ Q)~~ ~~ a~~ ~.~ ~~~
-gsg Em~ro;'>.. g.~e> 'Oij) ;5~
~ Q) ED 0 (]):e:E~ Q) ~~ a5 ~ ~ >.~
1D.o 2 8 CD ~~ cu .Q.,~ :5 E E ~ g t\1 := g
~gs ~>KE~~~~8Q) o~ 2~Q)
~.~ Q) ctS cu Q) "0 0 ::l Q) 0 ~ :>.D ::J'O ~
~rn: "OID~c>-~"O~-cu ~~ .~cc
en ~ Cf) C '5'" ctS C5 ~.~ :3 ~ a. <J 'm ~ 5 0
~oU ~_SE~E~Cf)-Q) (])> U"O
E=.~ C=O$~'U5'0~5o =ctS c5>.m
.-~D .Q~~.->ctS~uEm ~o c::E
25.~ ~1a~~:gQ)~o-.~.E-ffi Cf)O~
BroQ) ~~m;O~Ew~~ u.~ ~!c
"O~:5 0 -a.enE-o,~~ctS .s~ ~-o
i's~ ~~~~(;~~:2$0:: gs ~s;
_rr_ '-(j)_enE(])-~Q)Q) ow ct
~~Q)g>~Q)(.)u~E~"O~= ctS, :30
g~~i.~E~~~~~~s= ~j 8~~
:g 53 8 Q) a5 c & ctS ~ Q) CD ~ ~'3E 'S; 0 ~ Q) (f)
c: E 10 E o..Q <Il Ol 21 E ~ U E.>t: 0 g. (3.s::::
8~~!~~:5'~CD~~K>.~ ~~ Q)~'~
m-- E~ro>"OE ~~ o~ ~.-c
~E'~'O~E.E!!o Q)~(.) ;'ffi ~i~
~ or::( >. ai -g 0"'0 (.) >~,g ~ c..~ (]) = gu a...
'-CDt=-OQ)=~cen-Eo me> ,~~Q)
~"OQ)ctSg~as~EcuE~o~ ~c cugE
a: ,9, g. g :;:.~ ~ a.~ Q) Q) g ~ en 5 ~ ! ,- ..-
c~~ etScO<Dc~E~.-Cf) <JetS Q)~
~~~~:5~2=5~~~!~ci>a5~ ~~c
~ : :.~ ,~a...:= ~ 0 ~ Q) a.s ~ ~ ,~; &'~ 8
~c'~~~!~~~~~~Q)a.~Q)o Q)g~
~m~'-,2=E~58(])=:::l!E~B S~ctS
enEQ)>"c..<(Q)=(])C~roU_=co~ ro(])
cu~i~ ~~~'~:::lCJ)~~(.)EB ~~-
Q)53~~2~!g~2~~~~~~~ ~~~
~Eg~~~~'U5dQ)~~~~8~~~~ctSO
.2<(ctS~Err,.~g~~~g:5>.a.c~gQ)Q)
<DC~Q):3~gE::l ,c a.E~~(])O~=~
[) ~"E CD ~ >..~ E 0 5 ('is ~ g. Q) 0 '=:5 ~ .~ ~!
o~OE!~~oO~S~Q)~(])~~~E,~-
~j~~~~~~~~~~E~~~j'O~~~
.. ~ ~ U ~ 0 ~ E ~ ~ Q) 2 !? ~ ~.g g."Q) * 0 ~ ~
ei!~ .~J~~=E~2tigg>j(])~g~-g
~c~~g>a.ctS(.)eno~_S~.E=&E2~(.)TI
i ~ a. ~:e ~ ~ ~ ~ - (.) 5rcn ~ o.g (j).9.~ c 53'~
go::~'~~:cuctS~~~~~~~!~i~f~2
n: ufU g ,S ~ ~ -g ~ etS -~,~ Ci5 ~ ~ ~ 2 0> co Q) 0 S
~ 5000 c ~8.~ g~.Q g ctS'~.~u <5 ~E = g.
~:~~g2~~o~~~5~:5~~~83:~~~
>'~~'-~~Q)~Q)EEOQ)~cCf)~Cn::lO-
~'Oo~=~Cf)~~oE>-C>g::l~(])~~(.)~
>~~~RS~!!~~~~'~IDE~~~~~o
-(f)rra...cow~__~~~~>~~_etSa.~coen
U
ALFREDO L PENTEADO III
CANDYCEJPENTEADO
10001 INDEGO DR
EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347-1205
CHARLES R & KATHLEEN J MOWREY
6610 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7560
DANIEL C & JANE A MCKOWN
2171 PINEHURST DR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4579
DUANE R & SUSAN D MORRIS
343 SYDMOR DR E
BOISE ID 83706-5668
JOHN G II & BARBARA K JACOBSON
6719 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7570
LECY BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION INC
15012 HIGHWAY 7
MINNETONKA MN 55345-3634
MICHAEL L & AMY C DEGENEFFE
6654 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7560
RICHARD E & KAREN HERRBOLDT
6464 MURRAY HILL RD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8994
STEVEN P & KIMBERLY A LATTU
840 FOX CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9283
TIMOTHY P & HEIDI S LARKIN &
LECY BROS CONSTRUCTION
2150 CRESTVIEW DR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8009
BEN & MARGARET L1AO
3645 FORESTVIEW LN
PLYMOUTH MN 55441"1336
CURTIS W & NOELLE W SWENSON
6614 ALDER WAY
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4581
DAVID L & HOLLY J JESSEN
6618 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7560
IND SCHOOL DIST 276
5621 HIGHWAY 101
MINNETONKA MN 55345
KEITH K & CHRISTINE M CLARK
6620 CHESTNUT LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4580
LEIGH STOCKER BERGER
2140 PINEHURST DR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4579
PAUL J & KRISTI L BORCHERT
6636 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7560
ROBERT A JR & BRENDA KNESS
2121 CRESTVIEW DR
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8010
THOMAS & MARY KUHN
6693 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7560
TONKA DEVELOPMENT LLC
ATTN:MARY
18001 HIGHWAY 7
MINNETONKA MN 55345-4150
BRENT & KAREN HISLOP
810 OVERLOOK LN
VICTORIA MN 55386-3715
DAN V & CYNTHIA M SEEMAN
6673 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7560
DOUGLAS E & MARY K JOHNSON
6474 MURRAY HILL RD
EXCELSIOR MN 55331-8994
JOHN A & DEBORAH S MASCHOFF
6613 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7560
KIMBERLY K GOERS
6709 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7570
MICHAEL D & DEBRA H ANDERSON
6681 AMBERWOOD LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4582
PLOWSHARES DEVELOPMENT LLC
1851 WEST LAKE DR #550
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-8567
SANG C & NHI T KY
6729 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7570
THOMAS J & REBECCA J HAGEN
6633 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7560
TROY A BADER & GINA SAUER
2244 LAKE LUCY RD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-6706
WILLIAM 0 & KRISTEN K FLANAGAN
6653 BRENDEN CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-7560