The URL can be used to link to this page

1 Variance 9225 Lake Riley BlvdCiTY OF BOADATE: 11/05/97 CCDATE: CASE #: 97-11 VAR lqv. Kirchoff:v .... ........ ... :-.. ~ ~ ..._ ._.. ~. ~ :~ ...... :..: :_~-~-~-~: . ~ ..~ .: .~ ~ :-.. --.. ...... ~ .... . :o.~.~-~.~ ~-' ~ ~.:.. :-..,,..---:~_~: :~ PROPOSAL' STAFF REPORT A request for a thirty-four (34) foot variance from the seventy-five (75) foot shoreland setback and a seven (7) percent variance from the maximum lot coverage requirbrnent of ~venty-five (251) percent for the construction of a single-family residence. LOCATION: Lots 30 and 31, Shore Acres (Formerly 9223 and 9225 Lake Riley Blvd.) APPLICANT: Stephen Longrnan Builders 11491 Landing Road Eden Prairie, ~ 55347 937-2987 Gordon and Casey Alexander 8518 Cardiff Lane Eden Prairie, MN 55344 944-9291 PI{I~NIBIN I LIOINII'~tJ: ACREAGE: DENSITY: ~br, Sl'ngle F'amil'y R~si~nual Approximately 16,175 square feet N/A Itl ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USES: WATER AND SEWER: PHYSICAL CHARACTER: 2000 LAND USE PLAN: N'. S: E: W: PUD-R, Planned Unit Development, Residential RD, Recreational Development Lake, Lake Riley RD, Recreational Development Lake, Lake Riley RSF, Single-Family Residential Available to the site This site is two contiguous riparian lots on' Lake Riley, a recreational development lake. Lot 30 contains a 9 foot by 10 foot shed and Lot 31 contains a 22 foot by 33 foot cottage with a bituminous driveway and a 7 foot by 8 foot shed. The property has several large oak trees. Low Density Residential -. // Longman/Alexander Variance November 5, 1997 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS section 20-481 requires that structures be setback seventy-five (75) feet from recreational development lakes (Attachment 2). Section 20-615 states that the maximum lot coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is twenty-five (25) percent (Attachment 3). BACKGROUND Shore Acres subdivision was platted in 1951. The 42 lots range from 32 to 50 feet in width and 130 to 230 feet in depth. Originally, this subdivision served to accommodate cottages and summer homes. In response to the suburbanization of the City and the desire for year-round residences, contiguous lots have been assembled to create a larger buildable area. Although the "new" lots created a larger buildable area, many of the lots were lacking the depth to accommodate a modem home. Thus, many variances have been granted to allow the owner a reasonable use of their property. Of the original 42 lots, only 5 remain as single lots. Two of the five 5 are located directly adjacent to the subject property. The following variances have been granted on Lake Riley Boulevard: Variance # Address Tvl~e of Variance 96-9 9225 Lake Riley Blvd. Lot 31 3' east setback variance, 5 'west setback variance, a 33" shoreland setback variance and a variance from the hard surface coverage. The home was never constructed. This is one of the two lots in the subject application. 93-10 9119 Lake Riley Blvd. Lots 11 and 12 4' shoreland setback variance for garage and home addition 93-8 9243 Lake Riley Blvd. Lots 38 and 39 9' shoreland setback and 8' front yard setback variance for home addition 92-9 9021 Lake Riley Blvd. 36' shoreland setback variance for deck addition Longman/Alexander Variance November 5, 1997 Page 3 92-2 9221 Lake Riley Blvd. Lot 29 14' front yard, 6.5' side yard, and a 7% hard coverage variance for a detached garage 91-16 9203 Lake Riley Blvd. Lots 17, 18, & 19 7.5' side yard variance for a home addition 90-7 9051 Lake Riley Blvd. Lot 1 Rogers Add. 12' shoreland setback variance for a new home 89-13 9131 Lake Riley Blvd. Lots 15 & 16 4' side yard variance for home addition 89-1 9247 Lake Riley Blvd. Lot 42 14' front yard, 7' shoreland, and 4.5 side yard set back variances for a new home 87-8 9005 Lake Riley Blvd. 18' shoreland setback and lot area variances 86-1 9235 Lake Riley Blvd. Lots 34 & 35 40' shoreland setback variance for a new home Eight of these 11 variances were fi'om the shoreland setback (Attachment 6). The following offers an explanation. COMPARISON OF SHORELAND VARIANCES Number Address Lot depth Lot width Total area Variance Purpose Proposal 9225 and 187.5 avg. 70' street 16,175 33' home 9223 102' lake 96-9 9225 195' avg. 32.5' street 7,825 33' home 52' lake 93-10 9919 t30' 95' street 13,000 4' addition 102' lake 93-8 9243 140' avg. t00' both 14,000 9' addition 92-9 9021 92.5 avg. 150' both 13,875 36' addition 90-7 9051 120' 130' both 15,600 12' home 89-1 9247 145' 80' street 7,250 7' home 25' lake 87-8 9005 100' avg. 140' both 13,500 18' home 86-1' 9235 180' avg. 50' street 20,700 40' home (peninsula lot) *west and south portion of the lot have lake frontage Longman/Alexander Variance November 5, 1997 Page 4 This comparison was presented to show that each of these requests had situations that warranted relief. Not all variances are created equal. ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting relief from the shoreland setback and the maximum impervious surface requirement to construct a single-family home. Section 20-58 states that a reasonable use must be granted to the property owner. A reasonable use is defined as those comparable uses within 500 feet of the property. Under this section, the applicant would be entitled to construct a single-family home with a 2 stall garage on the property. The subject property is approximately 16,175 square feet, 1,175 square feet larger than the minimum in the RSF, Single-Family Residential district. Although the shoreland ordinance requires a minimum of 20,000 square feet for riparian lots, these are lots of record. The total buildable area is approximately 4,350 square feet (area within the setbacks), however, only approximately 4,000 square feet of this area can be covered with an impervious surface. This area would entitle the applicant to construct a 20 foot wide driveway and a 54 foot by 60 foot (footprint) residence at the 30 foot front yard setback (Attachment 7.2). Staff believes that this would offer a reasonable use to the applicant. The proposal indicates that the residence will contain over 4,589 square feet of living space and 1,656 square feet of garage space. The survey indicates that the house is proposed to be 41 feet from the ordinary high water mark of Lake Riley. This point is measured from the second story balcony. The City Code requires all structures to be placed 75 feet from the ordinary high water mark on recreational development lakes. Thus, the applicant's request for 34 feet of relief from the shoreland setback. The proposal also indicates that 32 percent or approximately 5,176 square feet of the lot will be covered with a hard surface. The City Code states that in RSF districts, the maximum coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is 25 percent. This is the second variance. Staff has prepared a template of the proposed home and placed it at the 30 foot setback from Lake Riley Boulevard and it still projects approximately 6 -7 feet into the shoreland setback and exceeds the hard surface requirement by approximately 2 percent (Attachment 7.1). This leads staff to believe that the home is too large for this lot. The City tends to promote homes that fit within the setbacks and meet ordinance requirements, rather than selecting a home plan and "making it fit" on the lot. In 1996, a variance was granted for Lot 31 (west lot) from the shoreland setback enabling a home to be constructed 42 feet from the ordinary high water mark. This home was never constructed, enabling the current owner to construct a home on Lots 30 and 31. Although the applicant's letter compared the current application with Variance #96-9, staff does not believe that there is a comparison (Attachment 1). Firstly, the lot area was one-half the size of the subject property. Secondly, the house was only 32 feet in width so it would have to encroach into the shoreland setback to allow the property owner to locate a 2 stall garage on the property as required by Longman/Alexander Variance November 5, 1997 Page 5 ordinance. In order for the owner to make reasonable use of the property, the house had to be long and nan'ow. Being this was a lot of record, the City had to grant relief so that a home could be built because of its shape. A sizable single family home could easily be constructed within the buildable area of the two contiguous lots. Staff fails to find a hardship that might warrant the granting of a variance in this case. In the applicant's letter it was stated that this proposal would blend in with the neighborhood and that they xvould like a reasonable use of the property, that is the same lake view. The proposed home is three stories. If it were allowed to be placed 41 feet from the ordinary high water mark of Lake Riley, it would not blend in with the neighboring homes. The size (in comparison to the neighboring homes) and the removal of the oak trees near the lake will decrease screening, enabling it to be seen. Secondly, a reasonable use is being allowed to build a comparable single- fan-tily home with a 2-stall garage similar to those within 500 feet. The applicant will still have a lake view since the rear of the home will have direct unobstructed views. The applicant has concerns over the safety of backing on to Lake Riley Boulevard. Certainly, the City understands their concern for safety. The proposal indicates that the neighboring garage structures xvould impede on clear sight distances. However, shifting the house to the 30 foot front yard setback will allow for a safer situation and much clearer sight distances. Furthermore, Lake Riley Boulevard is not a through street and is not anticipated to become one in the future. Hence, there is a limited number of vehicles traveling on it. LAKE/SHORELINE SETBACKS Lake Riley is a recreational development lake and is protected by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The DNR has previously set standards for setbacks on protected waters, which have been adopted by the City of Chanhassen. The setback for sewered structures on recreational development lakes is 75 feet. These setbacks have been developed by the DNR since these areas immediately adjacent to lakes, rivers and wetlands are critical in maintaining good water quality. This proposal increases the impervious surface of this lot from 1,426 square feet to 5,176 square feet, an increase of 23 percent. In addition, all runoff from this site is directly discharged into Lake Riley. Locating a house at the 30 foot setback would decrease the impe~-cious, increase the buffer to the lake and still enable a house to be built. The City has worked hard to be proactive in protecting water quality of its lakes and in doing so we have established favorable relationships with regulatory agencies, such as local watershed districts and the MnDNR. Chanhassen has earned the ability to regulate building permits without having duplicate reviews by other agencies. The City has also been working with lakeshore owners throughout the City, encouraging landscape plans that are "lake friendly" and stressing the importance of the lake impact zone. Longman/Alexander Variance November 5, 1997 ~age6 The shoreland management ordinance requires that the City notify the DNR of any requested variances that deviate from the set standards from shorelands. DNR staff has recommended denial of the proposed variance (Attachment 8). TREES Another issue addressed in the applicant's letter was the attempt to save the maple tree along Lake Riley Boulevard. The trees currently on site that are in good condition include in order of location, from street to lake are as follows' 26" silver maple, 14" ash, 24" ash, 18" white oak, 24" white oak, 20" maple, and 24" white oak. The applicant's proposal will remove four of the seven trees. Of the three left, two silver maples and a white oak, the large silver maple near the street will be impacted the most because grading will occur on three of its sides and a retaining wall and foundation will be installed within 15 feet of its base. For a tree of this size, such a substantial reduction of root mass could have damaging consequences and create a hazard tree. Silver maples are large trees that have weak wood and somewhat brittle branches that tend to break easily. Its root system is also vigorous and can damage paving and drain tile. For these reasons, it is not recommended for planting on small lots or near homes. If the home is built within the allowable building area, three trees would be removed, a silver maple and two ash. As stated earlier, the silver maple is not a good candidate for preservation because of its size and species characteristics and the ash will be removed with either plan. However, the white oaks directly south of the existing home' are valuable trees, both for property value and environmental reasons, and would be maintained in good condition if the home is kept at the 75 foot setback. Preserving the oaks would ensure the continued shoreline protection these trees have provided over the years by intercepting falling rain and holding the soil in place with their root structure. If the home is allowed a variance and four trees are removed, there will be an impact fi'om the increased impervious and decreased canopy cover along the shoreline. UTILITIES The parcel has an existing dwelling on it which is connected to city sewer. The city sewer line runs parallel to the shoreline of Lake Riley. Water services have been extended to the properties from Lake Riley Boulevard. Each lot (30 and 31) has individual water services available. The existing dwelling has been utilizing a well on the property. It is recommended that the existing well be abandoned and the new dwelling be required to connect to city water as part of the approval process. GRADING The type of dwelling (walkout) conforms to the land form. However, up to 8-feet of fill material will be required to construct the new driveway. Retaining walls up to four feet in height are proposed along the northerly side of the driveway to allow for drainage between the driveway Longman/Alexander Variance November 5, 1997 Page 7 and property line out to the lake. The site currently has an existing bituminous driveway along the westerly property line. The Certificate of Survey proposes that this driveway will be removed. Staff is questioning whether it will actually be removed since there is a proposed underground garage on the southerly side of the house which will have to be accessed through this 1 O-foot wide corridor. Staff is also concerned that this 10-foot corridor width is not sufficient room to access the lower garage without encroaching onto the neighboring property. The plans do not propose any driveway surface to access the lower garage. Given the drainage conditions, staff recommends that no hard surface be installed and that this area be maintained as a grass area. ACCESS The lot proposes to remove the existing driveway entrance and create a new one on Lot 30. Staff is comfortable with the relocation of the existing driveway as long as the existing driveway is abandoned, removed, and restored accordingly. If an alternate house plan was submitted, it is likely that it would meet the 75 foot shoreland setback and meet the maximum impervious surface requirement. Therefore, staff does not believe that a hardship has been demonstrated and a variance should not be granted. FINDINGS The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: 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 this criteria. Finding: The literal enforcement of the 75 foot shoreland setback and 30 foot setback would not cause an undue hardship. The property has a reasonable size with a reasonable buildable area. There is nothing unusual about this property to warrant relief. Although pre-existing standards exist in this area, granting this variance would depart downward from these standards. It is possible that the adjacent homes could be demolished in the future so that larger homes could be built, and those new homes would have to meet the shoreland setback. L~)ngman/Alexander Variance l'4ovember 5, 1997 P~ge 8 : The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. Finding: The conditions upon which this variance request is based are not applicable to most other property in the RSF zoning district. Although the City does have many lakeshore properties, most new homes maintain a 75 foot setback and do not exceed impervious surface requirements. C. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Finding: Staff does not believes that the purpose of this variance is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income of the property. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding: The hardship is self-created. A simple redesign of the house footprint, as well as shifting the house pad away from the lake would allow it to be in compliance with the City Code. If other options do not exist, staff would recommend approval, however, it is clear that there are other alternatives. 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 granting of the variance will be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. The site is located on a lake and green space is important in such cases to maximize the absorbency and filtering of water before it enters the lake. 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 variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties or increase the congestion of the public street. It will not endanger the public safety or diminish property values in the neighborhood. R~COMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals adopt the following motion: Longman/Alexander Variance November 5, 1997 Page 9 "The Board of Adjustments and Appeals denies the request for a 34 foot variance from the 75 shoreland setback and variance from the impervious surface requirement for the construction of a single-family home based upon the findings presented in the staff report." Should the Board of Adjustments and Appeals approve the request. The following conditions shall apply: The property owner shall abandon the existing well pursuant to the Minnesota Department of Health and connect the new dwelling to city water. . A detailed grading, drainage, and erosion control plan with 2-foot contours shall be submitted at time of building permit application for review and approval by the City. 3, The existing driveway shall be removed and restored with sod. No additional impervious surface shall be permitted to access the lower garage on the southerly side of the house. 4. The applicant must obtain a demolition permit for the existing structures on Lot 30 and 31. 5. Type [12 erosion control must be maintained until all vegetation has been restored. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Application andLetter 2. Section 20-48i, Shoreland Setbacks 3. Section 20-615, Lot Requirements and Setbacks 4. Survey 5. House Elevations and Floor Plan 6. Shoreland Setback Variances 7. Staff Revised Site Plans 8. Memorandum fi'om David Hempel dated October 28, 1997 9. Letter from Ceil Strauss, DNR dated October 30, 1997 10. Property Owners CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION TELEPHONE: ~'YV- '~ ,-.~ ~ / Comprehensive Plan Amendment COnditional Use Permit Interim Use Permit Non-conforming Use Permit Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Variance Wetland Alteration Permit NOTE - __ Planned Unit Development* __ Zoning Appeal Re,zoning Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits Sign Plan Review __ Notification Sign Site PJan Review* Subdivision* X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CU P/S PRNAC/VARANAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) TOTAL FEE $ '7~.~--~_~" A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. B~iding material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. ~'i'wenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2'' X 11" reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. '~ Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. 'TOT~J_ ACREAGE WETLANDS PRESENT :PRESENT ZONING YES ~)~,¢ NO REQUESTED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION REASON FOR THIS REQUEST 'k.; c,.'x-',. ,..¢, <_~ .~:. - -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 Depar~ent 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. -Thi~ 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 applica!ion 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 ~his application and the fee owner has also signed this application. 1 w~l 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 c'~y 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 for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. Si.gn~ Sig~re a~ee Owner ~pli~on Received on ]C':/~.,~( 7 Fee Paid -7- 77 Date Date Receipt NO. ~""7 ~ ']'he applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meetinc if not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. October 6, 1997 Chanhassen Zoning Board of Adjustments and Appeals CITY OF CH,~NHASSEN 1997 Members of the Board, We have recently purchased Lots 31 and 32, Shoreacres. It is our intention to combine the two lots to create one larger building site on which to build our home. We request the following variances for both lots 31 and 32 Variance #1. A 33 foot lake shore setback, sight line variance, including deck. Literal enforcement of the 75' lake shore setback would not allow us the reasonable use of the property that is enjoyed by our neighbors. By placing our proposed home directly behind the sight line of our two adjoining neighbors we would be blending with preexisting standards of the neighborhood and be able to enjoy the same lake view as the rest of the subdivision. Also, moving the proposed house back even a few feet behind the sight line would destroy the 26" diameter maple (see survey) which is the highlight of the property on the Lake Riley Blvd. side of the house. We would further point out that the city of Chanhassen has already granted a 33 foot lake shore setback variance, including deck, for Lot 31. Variance #2. A variance to exceed hard surface coverage by 7% Literal enforcement of the 25% hard surface coverage does not allow us to create a turn around area in our driveway forcing us to back up the existing hill onto Lake Riley Blvd. This situation is unsafe for us, our teenage drivers and our neighbors passing on the street. Please note that the city of Chanhassen has already granted a variance to exceed hard surface coverage by 25% on LOt 31. Lot 31 was also granted a 3 foot east and a 5 foot west side lot variance. However, we intend to exceed the-10 foot minimum side yard setbacks on both sides and will not be exercising that variance. Finally, please take into consideration that combining the two 50 foot lots into one 100' lakeshore lot is a benefit to the city and the neighborhood and alleviates the need for the more extreme variances that have proved necessary in the past for these and other 50' lakeshore lots. We hope you will recognize the logic and reasonableness of our request and grant us our variances. Respectfully, Gordon L. Alexander Jr. Casey G. Alexander ZONING § 20-481 Tributary Agricultural No Sewer Sewer Triplex 300 200 150 Quad 375 250 190 (4) Additional special provisions. Residential subdivisions with dwelling unit densities exceeding those in the tables in subsections (1), (2) and (3) can only be allowed if designed and approved as residential planned unit developments. Only land above the ordinary high water level of public waters shall be used to meet lot area standards, and lot width standards shall be met at both the ordinary high water level and at the building line. The sewer lot area dimensions in subsections (1), (2) and (3) can only be used if publicly owned sewer system service is available to the property. (Ord. No. 217, § 4, 8-22-94; Ord. No. 240, § 13, 7-24-95; Ord. No. 240, § 13, 7-24-95) Sec. 20-481. Placement, design, and height of structure. (a) Placement of structures on lots. When more than one (1) setback applies to a site, structures and facilities shall be located to meet all setbacks. Structures and onsite sewage treatment systems shall be setback (in feet) from the ordinary high water level as follows: Classes of Public Waters Lakes Natural environment ~J Recreational development Rivers Agricultural and tributary Se w age Structures ~reatment Unsewered Sewered System 150 150 150 100 75 75 100 50 75 When a structure exists on a lot on either side, the setback of a proposed structure shall be the greater of the distance set forth in the above table or the setback of the existing structure. One (1) water-oriented accessory structure designed in accordance with section 20-482(e)(2)(b) of this article may be setback a minimum distance often (10) feet from the ordinary high water level. (b) Additional structure setbacks. The following additional structure setbacks apply, regardless of the classification of the waterbody. Setback From: Setback (in feeO (1) Top of bluff; 30 (2) Unplatted cemetery; 50 (3) Right-of-way line of federal, state, 50 or county highway; and Supp. No. $ 1195 § 20-481 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE Setback From: (4) Right-of-way line of town road, pub- lic streets, or other roads or streets not classified. Setback (in feet) 2O (c) Bluff impact zones. Structures and accessory facilities, except stairways and landings, shall not be placed within bluff impact zones. (d) Nonresidential uses without water-oriented needs. Uses without water-oriented needs shall be located on lots or parcels without public waters frontage, or, fflocated on lots or parcels with ~ublic waters frontage, shall either be set back double the normal ordinary high water level setback or be substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions. (e) Design criteria for structures. (1) High water elevations. Structures shall be placed in accordance with any flood plain regulations applicable to the site. Where these controls do not exist, the elevation to which the lowest floor, including basement, is placed or floodproofed shall be determined as follows: a. For lakes, by placing the lowest floor at a level at least three (3) feet above the highest known water level, or three (3) feet above the ordinary high water level, whichever is higher; b. For rivers and streams, by placing the lowest floor at least three (3) feet above the flood of record, if data axe available. If data are not available, by placing the lowest floor at least three (3) feet above the ordinary high water level, or by conducting a technical evaluation to determine effects of proposed construction upon flood stages and flood flaws and to establish a flood protection elevation. Under all three (3) approaches, technical evaluation§ shall be done by a qualified engineer or hydrologist consistent with parts 6120.5000 to 6120.6200 governing the management of flood plain areas. If more than one (1) approach is used, the highest flood protection elevation determined shall be used for placing structures and other facilities; and c. Water-oriented accessory structures may have the lowest floor placed lower than the elevation determined in this item if the structure is construed of flood- resistant materials to the elevation, electrical and mechanical equipment is placed above the elevation and, if long duration flooding is anticipated, the structure is built to withstand ice action and wind-driven waves and debris. (2) Water-oriented accessory structures. Each lot may have one (1) water-oriented accessory structure not meeting the normal structure setback in section 20-481(a) if this water-oriented accessory structure complies with the following provisions: a. The structure or facility shall not exceed ten (10) feet in height, exclusive of safety rails, and cannot occupy an area greater than two hundred fifty (250) square feet. Detached decks shall not exceed eight (8) feet above grade at any point. Supp. No. 8 1196 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 tkis 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 illustrated below. CHANHASSEN CITY CODE Lot~ Wh.re Front~g~ I~ I~e~ur~d At 8.tb~ok (3) 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 /Fieo Lots Frofl-, Lot Llflo (4) (5) lO0/Lot Width The maximum lot coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is twenty-five (25) percent. The setbacks are as follows: a. For front yards, thirty (30) feet. b. For rear yards, thirty (30) feet. Supp. No. 9 1212 ZONING § 20-632 (6) c. For side yards, ten (10) feet. 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(7)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. 20-617--20-630. Reserved. ARTICI,E XIII. '~R-4" M/XED LOW DENSITY RESIDENT/AL 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~ %vo-family dwellings. Supp. No. 9 1213 Z .. '" Id,; I. -- ~' -- - ..... ', .............. : ' ,:. ~ ~ --~':--~-------------~ _- '--> P'----a z ....... ~ '::;' , Ii',.z -; . - 1: J ..... ~~- ~-. !,_...,I ...... , . .. ~::-=:!!t , !~ . '. ,'~-'...,,i~Yi: '~'-'~X~ -~-' ---~- -Z ~ '- ' _~__~.,; ~ ...... ,, .... ..... ,.. I'. I 1'1 ~.;',,' ~ll I...I i ~J'l . . :, ~.1' ,f ,'iI ~,~ ,' I . ~ i.. "i': l.I ' II. ii, , I, 'i ~ ~ . ', "l .'~;I ......... Og9 ........... ,i OJ · / 0 CER -IF CA-E O SURVEY ~ pFr-F-~wRO .OCT 0 8 1997 '~"'~- CHANH,~:~ P'L~, ....... o ~PT . LAKE RILE '~"~ ~" " Y 8 L V u~, - ~ 7~ ~r~, ~ ~X//F. L. LEGAL DF..qCR T PTI ON Lot~///CZ. gZ, SHORE ACRES, Ca rv.:r Cot:nEy, Hinn~c,b~, p' __-___..% KlM A. REAUME BOOK PAGE ,/~osuqv[Yon PROJECT NO. SHEET '~ 612-475-1314 , SURVEYS~ 612-475-1015 F&X REVISIONS 3305 GARIAtlD ~[N[ H PIYMOUTi 1, MIt4t.I[SOIA 5544 7 %. o DENOTES IRON FOUND · DENOTES IRON SET '- DENOTES DIRECTION OF SURFACE FLOW x~ DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION (xxx) DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION PROPOSED ELEVATIONS LOWEST FLOOR GARAGE FLOOR ~77.?.~TOP OF FOUNDATION__ 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 TIlE LAWS OF THE ":~'~ STATE OF MINNESOTA., ," DATE ~-~__.0-?~ REG. NO. 19522 ' ',¥:i.. CERTIF CATEO = SURVEY ~ ~,,,,,~-'.,-',,',,.1~-\~ .. . ~ ~ -- . .- ~. ,, ~~ ~,~-~ ~,,~ I1(~'~1 .~ I,., ~l ~ : ~~.,~" j Minnesota. =m~Zz~ ..... ~ ~ ~ JJ-~ 't'~~-~''''- ~s~,~,, c~,.~; / c~. .~ ' h~ ~ ~ ' - ..... ;~;7':'~ - , . 4 f / DENOTES IRON FOUND / s DENOTES IRON SET 6~' / ~ DENOTES DIRECTION OF SURFACE FLOW xxx DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION '"~£z/'"w~'a~'~r~'~'s'/~'~J I (x~x) DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION PROPOSED ELEVATIONS ~7~.~g GARAGE FLOOR ~7~7~ TOP OF FOUNDATION_ 7 PLAN, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY .ME ~~~~'/~>~'~: ~O~t%-I ~.ISHEET OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND I 612-475-13],1 SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE . · SURVEYS~ 61?.475.]olsrAx REVISIONS STATE OF MINNESOTA.. ,': 3305 GAR~ND ptYMOUtH. M[NN[SOt~S544~ DATE ~-~0- y~ REG NO. 19522 .w C -Y 0-- 690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 93:7-1900 · FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Cindy Kirchoff, Planner I David Hempel, Assistant City Engineer DATE: October 28, 1997 SUB J: Review of Variance for 9223 and 9225 Lake Riley Boulevard, Lots 30 and 31, Shore Acres- Land Use Review File No. 97-16 Upon review of the plan Certificate of Survey prepared by Klm Reaume dated August 20, 1996, revised October 3, 1997, I offer the following comments and recommendations: UTILITIES The parcel has an existh~g dwelling on it which is connected to city sewer. The city sewer line runs parallel to the shoreline of Lake Riley. Water service have been extended to the properties from Lake Riley Boulevard. Each lot (30 and 31) has individual water services available. The existing dwelling has been utilizing a well on the property. It is recommended that the existing well be abandoned and the new dwelling be required to connect to city water as part of the approval process. GRADING The type of dwelling (walkout) conforms to the land form. However, up to 8-feet of fill material will be required to construct the new driveway. Retaining wails up to four feet in height are proposed along the northerly side of the driveway to allow for drainage between the driveway and property line out to the lake. The site currently has an existing bituminous driveway along the southerly property line. The Certificate of Survey proposes for this driveway to be removed. Staff is questioning whether it will actually be removed since there is a proposed underground garage on the southerly side of the house which will have to be accessed through this 10-foot wide corridor. Staff is also concerned about this 10-foot corridor width that it is sufficient room to access the lower garage without encroaching onto the neighboring property. The plans do not propose any driveway surface to access the lower garage. Given the drainage conditions, staff recormnends that no hard surface be installed and that this area be maintained as a grass area. ~indy Kirchoff O~ ctober 28, 1997 Rage 2 cc ss ~he, lot proposes to remove the existing driveway entrance and create a new one on Lot 30. Staff is domfortable with the relocation of the existing driveway as long as the existing driveway is abandoned, removed, and restored accordingly. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL li. The property owner shall abandon the existing well pursuant to the Minnesota Department of Health and connect the new dwelling to city water. 2~ A detailed grading, drainage, and erosion control plan with 2-foot contours shall be submitted at time of building permit application for review and approval by the City. The existing driveway shall be removed and restored with sod. No additional impervious surface shall be permitted to access the lower garage on the southerly side of the house. c: Charles Folch, Director of Public Works Anita Benson, Project Engineer \'~fsl\vo12XcngXdavcXtx'X9223-9225 lk riley blvd vat.doc SENT BY' BNR I,...,IETRO~ 10-30-97 10'11 6127727573 =::' 612 937 5739~ Mi ncsota l')epa '[ ncnt (.)t Natural Rcsou 'ces Metro Waters ~ t200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793 Telephone: (612) 772-7910 Fax: (612) 772-7977 ! #2; 3 October 30, t997 Ms. Cindy Kirchoff City of Charthassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 553 17 Stephen Long-man Variance Request (City #97-11), Riley Lake (10-2), City of Chanhassen, Carver County Dear Ms, Kirchoff: DNTR Waters has reviewed the Longma_n variance rcquest site plans received October 17, 1997. Mr. Longman is requesting 32-percent impervious cover (versus city standard of 25-percent) and a 41 foot setback (versus the city requirement of 75 feet) for the lot at what was formally 9223 and 9225 Lake Riley Boulevard. We recommert¢ that_the city deny the c~rrent pr.oposat. Hardship must be demonstrated to justify receiving a variance. The approval of a variance due to hardship should be based on the folloMng prerequisites: 1. The proposed use is reasonable, 9 It would be unreasonable to require conformance w/th the ordinance. Practical dift2cuities prevent conformance; economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties, . The difficulty et' conforming to the ordinance is due to circumstances unique to the property. 4. The problem must not be created by the landowner. 5. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Based on our review of the proposal, most of the above prerequisites for demonstrating hardship are not met, This lot is greater than 16,000 square feet and, therefore, more than adequate to acconm~odate a large variety of' configurations that coutd meet the city's ordinance requirements. Reasonable use of this lot can be made without a variance, ,SENT BY' )NR [4ETRO~ 10-30-97 10'11~ 61 27727573 => 612 937 5739; [Cindy Kirchoff :iOctober 30, 1997 ~age 2 iThe courts have said that the applicant has a "heavy burden of proof" to show that all the prerequisites to the granting of a variance are satisfied. This is because a variance allows property ~to be used in a manner forbidden by the ordinance. ;In accordance with the city ordinance, the Department is to be advised of the action taken on this request within 10 days of final action. If the current proposal is approved, copies of the hearing minutes, findings of fact and other relevant documents should also be forwarded. Please contact me at 772-7914 should you have questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, , ( ..... Ceil Strauss 'Area Hydrologist #3/3 Riley-Purgatory-Bluff. Creek Watershed District, Bob Obermeyer City of Chanhassen Shoreland File NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Wednesday, November 5, 1997 at 6:00 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers 690 Coulter Drive PROJECT: Shoreland Setback Variance DEVELOPER' Stephen Longman LOCATION: Lots 30 & 31, Shore Acres NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant, Stephen Longman, is requesting a 34 foot variance to the required 75 foot shoreland setback for the construction of single family residence on property zoned RSF and located at 9223 and 9225 Lake Riley Blvd. (Lots 30 & 31, Shore Acres). 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 Commission 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. The commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. 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 October 23, 1997. LtJNDGREN BI'OS. 935 E. WAYZA~TA BLVD. M~ 55391 ! DONALD 8, KA-HRYN SITTER 9249 I_~KE RIleY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 STEPHEN LONGMAN BLDRS 13539 OAK HILL COURT EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 RONALD YTZEN 9227 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 PAMELA N GUYER 340 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ROBERT MURRAY 360 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MICHAEL & CI::tYSTAL SCHACHTERLE 6350 DOGWOOD AVE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 ALAN H & KAREN L DIRKS 9203 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN,tMN 55317 LELAND G SAPI~ & DIANE K TAYLOR 5354 PARKDALE DR #200 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 FREDERICK POTTHOFF III & 9231 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JOHN W ARDOYNO 9235 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 PAUL KENT OLSON 9239 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 KEVIN M & LINDA P SHARKEY 380 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 PAUL E & GAlL A TERRY 400 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RICHARD R & JILL M MADORE 381 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CURTIS G KRIER 9211 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, VIN 55317 SUNNYSLOPE HOMEOWNERS ASSN 341 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 SCOq-F ALAN WIRTH 361 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 GREGORY L & I~ELLY R HASTINGS 9217 LAKE RILE~ BLVD CHANHASSEN, ~N 55317 DENNIS R & ANI~i BAKER 9219 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, I~N 55317 JOY A SMITH 9243 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 LUCILLE LOUISE REMUS 9245 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 STEVEN A & PATRICIA A SEKELY 341 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ROBERT EVANS 331 DEERFOOT TRL EDINA, MN 55436 E. MICHAEL DOMKE 9221 LAKE RILEy BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CATHY HARGREAVES 300 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 KENT TAGE RAMLIDEN & 321 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 & CASEY ALEXANDER 6895 SAND RIDGE RD. EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 ROBERT D & KRISTIN S REBERTUS 320 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DALE B & DIANE KUTTER 301 DEERFOOT TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RANDI E BOYER ROBINSON 9005 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ANTHONY DONAHUE 9015 LAKE RILEY RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 NORMAN C JR & KIMBERLY GRANT 9021 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 TODD PORTER 9261 KIOWA TRL CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BARRY A & HARRIET F BERSHAW 9271 KIOWA TRL CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PETER PEMRICK JR & 9251 KIOWA TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 WILLIAM J O'NEILL 9550 FOXFORB RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CRAIG W & KATHRYN HALVERSON 9283 KIOWA TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 CRAIG W & KATHRYN HALVERSON 9283 KIOWA TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 STEVEN A & RENEE WILLIAMS 7600 HERITAGE RD EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55346 SCOTT A & SUSAN M BABCOCK 8570 MAGNOLIA TRL-APT 112 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 PETER C & GEORGE-ANN LILLIE 9355 KIOWA TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RICHARD C BLUMENSTEIN & 9361 KIOWA TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JOHN W & BEVERLY J BELL 9371 KIOWA TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 MARK A & PAMELA K MOKSNES 9381 KIOWA TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 JOYCE E KING 9391 KIOWA TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 WILLIAM L & LINDA C JANSEN 240 EASTWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 WILLIAM S FIENAK & 280 EASTWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 WILLIAM S HENAK & 280 EASTWOOD CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DAVID P & KAREN L DAOUST 9470 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RICHARD A & JOANNE M LAMETTRY 9490 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 DENNIS M MILLS 9510 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RICHARD J CHADWICK 9530 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 LAKE RILEY WOODS HOMEOWNERS C/O PAUL MARTIN 9610 FOXFORD RD CHANHASSEN, MN 55315 DAVID O HANSEN 108 PIONEER TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 WILLIAM T & CAROL ANN GRAY 50 PIONEER TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 PAUL TAUNTON 9980 DEERBROOK DR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 STEVEN F & KATHLEEN M BURKE 9591 MEADOWLARK LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 TIM ERHART 9611 MEADOWLARK LN CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RICHARD P VOGEL 105 PIONEER TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 "MICHAEL T · TERESA A MONK 9671 MEADOW LARK LN ~NHASSEN, MN 55317 MICHAEL J &LISA A REILLY 2305 INDIAN RIDGE DR GLENVIEW, L 60025 DELBERT R & NANCY R SMITH 9051 LAKE R LEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RAYMOND M!& JUDITH N LEWIS 9071 LAKE RI _EY BLVD CHANHASSE',I, MN 55317 ROBERT H & 3HERYL A PETERSON 9101 LAKE RI.EY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 NATHAN BERGELAND 9111 LAKE RIIrEY BLVD CHANHASSE~, MN 55317 J P JR & JUDI-H M HUNGELMANN 9117 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEP JOHN B JR & ~ 9119 LAKE RII' , MN 55317 4ARLYN G GOULE'I-i' EY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 RICHARD D & --RIEDA A OLIN 9125 LAKE RII.=y BLVD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ID DUHAIN, E 9131 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 ALAN H & KAREN L DIRKS 9203 LAKE RILEY BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 NEW_PID HOUSE_NO STREET 25-0240200 9005 25-0240300 9015 25-0240500 9021 25-0240600 9261 25-0240900 9271 ~ 25-0241000 9251 25-025 9431 ~25:0900020 9283 ~25-0900030 9285 .... 25-0900040 9291 c25:0900050 9351 ~25-0900060 9355 LAKE RILEY BLVD LAKE RILEY BLVD LAKE RILEY BLVD KIOWA TRL KIOWA TRL KIOWA TRL HWY 101 KIOWA TRL KIOWA TRL KIOWA TRL KIOWA TRL KIOWA TRL NAME ADD1 DALE L & RANDI E BOYER ¢-'~"" 9005 LAKE RILEY BENJAMIN E & PAT-R-ICm'-A NL)idlVl/41'q~ JR & KIMBERLY EL-D (~N-&-R AE-J E-A N-BE-BKL-ANB BARRYA & HARRIET F BERSHAW 9271 KIOWA TRL L_on ADD2 9015 LAKE RILEY RD 9021 LAKE RILEY 9261 KIOWA TRL PETER PEMRICK JR & 9251 KIOWA TRL WILLIAM J O'NEILL 9550 FOXFORD RD CRAIG W & KATHRYN ,~_,.,.-'~' ,"s.~,.'~--, 9283 KIOWA TRL CRAIG W & KATHRYN 9283 KIOWA TRL _ _ _ STEVEN A & RENEE WILLIAMS 7600 HERITAGE RD SCOTT A & SUSAN M BABCOCK 8570 MAGNOLIA PETER C & GEORGE-ANN LILLIE 9355 KIOWA TRL L.25,0900070 t~25-0900080 L...---25-0900090 .~.--25-0900100 ~-"25-4080080 25-4080090 25-4080100 .25-4080110 '25-4080120 ~.25-4080130 9361 9371 9381 9391 240 280 9470 9490 9510 KIOWA TRL KIOWA TRL KIOWA TRL KIOWA TRL EASTWOOD CT EASTWOOD CT FOXFORD RD FOXFORD RD FOXFORD RD RICHARD C BLUMENSTEIN & JOHN W & BEVERLY J BELL MARK A & PAMELA K MOKSNES JOYCE E KING WILLIAM L & LINDA C JANSEN WILLIAM S HENAK & WILLIAM S HENAK & 9361 KIOWA TRL 9371 KIOWA TRL 9381 KIOWA TRL 9391 KIOWA TRL 240 EASTWOOD CT 280 EASTWOOD CT 280 EASTWOOD CT DAVID P & KAREN L DAOUST 9470 FOXFORD RD RICHARD A & JOANNE M Z~_f,..:~.. 9490 FOXFORD RD _ DENNIS M MILLS 9510 FOXFORD RD ',~25-4080140 9530 25-4080360 · ,,~25-4090010 108 ~2.5-4090020 50 25-4090030 i. 10 ~25~7420050 9591 f~25:-7420060 9611 / 25-7420070 105 ~2.5-7420080 9671 /.~.25-7420090 9701 25-7470010 ;~7! '-~--25-7470020 9071 ~. 25-7950020 9101 FOXFORD RD / ~ !'~.,.,~.; t'~ '~5';~*- ' i ~.:~:~' ' PIONEER TRL RICHARD J CHADWICK LAKE RILEY WOODS H"gA DAVID O HANSEN 9530 FOXFORD RD 1-660 I I~FFE-4~2-8- 108 PIONEER TRL PIONEER TRL WILLIAM T & CAROL ANN GRAY 50 PIONEER TRL ':'k ' ~ ~' ,' :::'--~ L ?: '~-:? '~ MEADOWLARK LN STEVEN F & KATHLEEN M BURKE 9591 MEADOWLARK . . MEADOWLARK LN WILLIAM&~HAR~ 9611 MEADOWLARK PIONEER TRL RICHARD P VOGEL 105 PIONEER TRL MEADOWLARK LN MEADOWLARK LN LAKE RILEY BLVD LAKE RILEY BLVD MICHAEL T & TERESA A MONK MICHAEL J & LISA A REILLY DELBERT R & NANCY R SMITH RAYMOND M & JUDITH N LEWIS ROBERT H & CHERYL A I ~.c.:...~.: .... . _ _ 9671 MEADOW 2305 INDIAN RIDGE 9051 LAKE RILEY 9071 LAKE RILEY 9101 LAKE RILEY _ . - · ' NEW_PID -795O050 25-7950050 25-79500~0 25-79500~0 25-79500~0 HOUSE_NO 9111 9117 9119 9125 9131 9203 STREET LAKE RILEY BLVD LAKE RILEY BLVD LAKE RILEY BLVD LAKE RILEY BLVD LAKE RILEY BLVD LAKE RILEY BLVD NAME ADD1 : ~AM~-S L TONJES /~"~-~,~'--,'~-.-~ J P JR & JUDITH M HUNGELMANN 9117 LAKE RILEY _ . JOHN B JR & MARLYN G GOULETT 9119 LAKE RILEY RICHARD D & FRIEDA A OLIN 9125 LAKE RILEY JAMES LEE HENDRICKSON 9181 LAKE RILEY ALAN H & KAREN L DIRKS 9203 LAKE RILEY ADD2 PO BOX 1113