1 Variance 1834 Valley Ridge Tr STAFF
PROPOSAL:
_ · i the construction
~- : _ ~ s~deyar ,
' :¥J~OCATION:- t 834
' :-' (Lot 1, B
:'PRESENT ZONING::
.: 2020 LANDUSE'PLAN:
'i[~i. 'iN°rice Or:this
R'dc e Trai
~idg
Iai
/
/
I
I
I
I
,/> S°uth .l __~
Su~~'~ ,_ ///
Edstrom Variance
April 26, 2000
Page 2
APPLICABLE REGUATIONS
Section 20-615 (5) c. requires a 10 foot side yard setback on properties zoned RSF.
Section 20-908 (5) a. states that open porches may encroach 3 feet into a required setback.
BACKGROUND
This lot is part of Bluff Creek Estates 5th Addition, which was approved in 1994. The home was
constructed in the same year. According to the City's wetland inventory map, an ag/urban wetland is
present on the site. It will not be impacted by this application. There is also a Williams Brothers
pipeline easement on the south portion of the site. This easement is not affected by these proposals.
The applicant would like to construct an open porch on the front of the home and a carport on the side of
the garage. Both additions encroach into required setbacks.
(Note: The City is proposing an amendment to the ordinance to permit open porches to encroach 10 feet
into the required 30 foot front yard setback for houses built prior to February 19, 1987. This
encroachment does not apply to this property.)
ANALYSIS
The applicant is seeking two variances: a 1 foot variance from the 27 foot front yard setback permitted
for open porches to construct a 7 foot deep by 22 foot wide open porch (the zoning ordinance permits
open porches to encroach 3 feet into a required setback, thus the 27 foot front yard setback) and a 6 foot
variance from the required 10 foot side yard setback for the construction of a carport.
Permitted Use
This site is zoned RSF, Single Family Residential. A single family home can be legally constructed
on the site. The zoning ordinance (Section 20-1124 (2) f) requires two parking spaces, both of which
shall be completely enclosed for single-family dwellings. Currently, a single family dwelling with a
two-stall garage is on site.
Reasonable Use
A reasonable use is defined as the use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet. A
"use" can be defined as "the purpose or activity for which land or buildings are designed, arranged or
intended or for which land or buildings are occupied or maintained." In this case, because it is in a
RSF zoning district, a reasonable use is a single-family home u, ith a two-stall garage. The property
owner currently has a reasonable use of the site.
The existing home maintains the following front yard setbacks: 33 feet at the living space and 30 feet
at the garage. The zoning ordinance permits open porches to encroach 3 foot into a setback, leaving 6'
feet to construct a porch on this site. The applicant is proposing to construct a 7 foot deep open porch
and is requesting a 1 foot variance. Staff believes that six feet is ample space to protect the front door
Edstrom Variance
April 26, 2000
Page 3
from the elements and create an interesting entry to the home. Since a front open porch can be
constructed on the site without a variance, a hardship is not present.
The applicant is also requesting a variance to construct a carport to park a boat to the side of the
existing two-stall garage, which maintains a 15 foot setback. A 5 foot drainage and utility easement
extends along the side property line (leaving 10 feet for a parking slab). The proposed carport is 11
feet in width, 24 feet in depth and 11-12 feet in height. The carport is proposed to be located 3 feet
behind the existing garage elevation and 4 feet from the property line. Further, the applicant intends
to construct a retaining wall behind the carport. The zoning ordinance does not require a setback for
retaining walls; however, if they are over 5 feet in height, they must be engineered and a building
permit is required (Sec. 20-118).
The applicant already has a reasonable use of the site with a two-stall garage, so a hardship has not been
demonstrated. Furthermore, the proposal encroaches into a drainage and utility easement and this is to
remain fi'ee of structures. If the property owner wishes to park a boat on the side of the garage on an
improved surface, a bituminous surface can be placed on the site without a variance.
Staff has received comments from the neighbor opposing the variance for the carport. The letter is
attachment 6.
Since the applicant .has not demonstrated a hardship for the porch nor the carport, staff recommends
denial of both variances.
FINDINGS
The Plam~ing Commission shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless
they find the following facts:
no
That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship. Undue hardship
means that the propelly 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 zoning ordinance does not cause an undue hardship.
The applicant has a reasonable use of the site. It is not a hardship to be without a carport. The
applicant has an opportunity to construct an open porch without a variance.
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 is based apply to all residentially zoned
properties.
Edstrom Variance
April 26, 2000
Page 4
Co
The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential
of the parcel of land.
Finding: Staff does not believe increasing the value is the sole intent of the request.
d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship.
Finding: The hardship is self-created, as a reasonable use already exists on the site.
eo
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: Although the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood, it will permit front and side yard
setbacks that are less than others found in this development.
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 danger to the public, but it will allow two structures to be.located closer together
than other structures in this neighborhood.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion:
"The Planning Commission denies the variance request (00-7) for a 1 foot variance from the 27 foot
fi'ont yard setback for the construction an open porch and a 6 foot variance from the 10 foot side yard
setback for the construction of a carport based upon the following:
1. The applicant has a reasonable use of the property.
2. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship."
Attachments
1. Application and letter
2. Relevant City Ordinances
3. Survey with proposed additions and Elevation of carport
4. Public hearing notice
5. Letter from neighbor
g:\plan\ck\boa\edstrom var 00-7.doc
02/24/00 14:54 FAX 812.937 5739 CITY OF CHANE&SSEN ~002
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937-1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPUCATION
OWNER:
TELEPHONE:
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Temporary Sales Permit
Conditional Use Permit
Interim Use Permit
Non-conforming Use Permit
PLanned Unit Development°
Razoning
Vacation of ROW/Easements
Wetland Alteratfon Permit
_ Zoning Appeal
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Sign Permits
_ Sign Ptan Review
Site Plan Review'
Subdivision*
~ Notification Sign
Escro r Filing Fees/Att~g;31~ Cost"
X. ' ~v~.~°e'~UP/SPR/VAC~fA~NAP/Metes----
an-~-d Bounds, $400 Mf'~-r SUB)
TOTAL FEE $
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the
application.
-[h,,~ifl¢ ,.atcrial -'.c, omples must be sabmitted with site plan rcvle,vs.
~l:wcnty ~;x fuil~i,~= tur,.h=d u,~,i=s ef thc plans ,nust bs sub;~ittCd, lncludiny -,n 81/=" X 1 I" redu~.ad copy oL
*,-;ne,~r~.n~'y fnr ~e.h rd;,,rl =heel
'* Escrow wi]! be required for other applications through the development contract
NOTE -When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
02/24/00 14:54 FAX 612 937 5739 CITY OF CHANHASSEN ~003
PRDJECT NAME
LEGAL ~t:::S CRIP'I'ION
-~O?ALACP, EAGE
WEll. ANDS PRESENT
YES
__NO
.~,RI~"~_ ?=NT ZONING
P, EQL1ESTED ZONING
PRE. SENT LAND USE DESIGNATION
]:~EOU£STED LAND USE DESIGNATION
]~EASON FOR THIS REQUEST ~]FEP P~'DD[7~Of']/G-(-- ~~ ~~ /~
~ ~pli~tion must be ~mpleted in full and be ~ewri~en or clear~ pdnted ~d must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable Ci~ Ordin~ce provisions. Before fili~ ~ appli~tion, you should ~nfer ~ the Planning
9ep~em to determine the specific ordinan~ and pr~edu~l requiremen~ applicable to your applicaaon.
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of appliCation submittal. A written
r~tJce z~f application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application.
-I'hfs ~ to cert~ that ! 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 applicat, 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
Ihis application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
-1 'w~ keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of matedal and the progress of this application, I further
~ndersta~d 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
myAnmwledge.
The c'~ 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 apprgye
5! p,can
$igna~re of Fee Owner
.Appl'cafion Rece]ved on
l~e applicant.
Date
Date
Receipt No.
The appTicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting.
If z~c~ contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address.
From:
Subject:
Chanhassen Planning Commission
Tom Edstrom
Request for Variance
CfT¥ OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVED
3 o 2000
I would like to make a cOuple of improvements to my home and am facing a couple of
challenges in doing so. I currently do not have a place to park my boat and really don't
want to leave it in the driveway. I would like to widen my driveway and park the boat
back away from the street along side of my existing garage. In addition, I would like to
build an overhang extending out from my front door. We currently don't have any
protected space outside of the front door of the home.
My home is on a lot that has a pipeline running through it with an easement on one side
with no room for access from that direction. The lot line on the other side of the home is
only 15 feet from the existing structure. I want to blacktop an area next to my garage on
this side of the lot. I also have a five foot easement to contend with on this side. The
blacktop extension needs to be approximately 11 feet wide and run beyond the back of
the garage. I also need to protect the boat from the harsh Minnesota winters and want to
bUild a structure to do so. I need to be granted a variance in order to meet my objectives.
The distance between my garage and the lot line gets greater as you move back on the lot.
So, the variance required does not run the entire distance of the requested driveway and
new structure. I have enclosed my plot plan and marked it up to reflect the changes I want
to make. Also enclosed is a drawing of the structure I would like to build. The proposed
structure is exactly like one that already exists in my neighborhood. I believe this
variance request is justified because what I am proposing to do would blend with a pre-
existing standard within the neighborhood. In addition, my neighbor on that side has no
view of the area in question. It is on the garage side of his home and there are no
windows on his house that view the area.
The second variance needed relates to the set back requirement from the street. I
understand there is a 30 foot set back and my home is currently approximately 33 feet
back. I have also been told that it is acceptable to encroach 3 ft into the 30 ft. I would like
to build a front porch area that extends out 8-9 feet from the home. We have three young
children and the home has no mud room to take off winter boots and snow pants. The
overhang would provide a protected area for this purpose and provide a front elevation
that would blend much better with other homes in the area. Our home currently doesn't
blend well with other homes in the area because most of them have a variety of angles
and roof pitches that our home doesn't have. I believe this addition would enable the
home to blend well with other homes in the area and provide the needed protection from
the winter climate.
I will need the city to provide a list of property owners within 500 feet of the property
boundary. I understand that I will have to pay $1.50 per name and am willing to incur
that expense. Please provide the necessary list.
I appreciate the opportunity to make this request and any time you have spent reviewing
it. I look forward to your response as soon as possible. Thank you !
Tom Edstrom /
a fey R-Id'ge Trail
Chanhassen, Minnesota
North
Home Phone: 361-0580
Work Phone: 543-6075
§ 20-595 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
b. For accessory structures, three (3) stories/forty (40) feet.
(7) The minimum driveway separation is as follows:
a. If the driveway is on 'a collector street, four hundred (400) feet.
b. If the driveway is on an arterial street, one thousand two hundred fii~y (1,250)
feet.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 4(5-4-5), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 127, § 2, 3-26-90; Ord. No. 170, § 2, 6-8-92;
Ord. No. 194, § 2, 10-11-93)
Sec. 20-596. Interim uses.
The following are interim uses in the "RR" District:
(1) Commercial kennels and stables.
(Ord. No. 120, § 3, 2-12-90)
Editor's note--Inasmuch as there exists a § 20-595, the provisions added by § 3 of Ord. No.
120 as § 20-595 have been redesignated as § 20-596.
Secs. 20-597--20-610. Reserved.
ARTICI.E XII. '~RSF" SINGLE.FAMII.Y RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Sec. 20-611. Intent.
The intent of the "RSF" Distrqct is to provide for single-family residential subdivisions.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5-1), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-612. Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in an "RSF" District:
(1) Single-family dwellings.
(2) Public and private open space.
(3) State-licensed day care center for twelve (12) or fewer children.
(4) State-licensed group home serving six (6) er fewer persons.
(5) Utility services.
(6) Temporary real estate office and model home.
(7) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5-2), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 259, § 11, 11-12-96)
Sec. 20-613. Permitted accessory uses.
The following are permitted accessory uses in an "RSF" District:
(1) Garage.
Supp. No. 9 1210
(2) Storage building.
(3) Swimming pool.
(4) Tennis court.
(5) Signs.
(6) Home occupations.
(7) One (1) dock.
(8) Private kennel.
ZONING § 20-615
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5-3), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-614. Conditional uses.
The following are conditional uses in an "RSF" District:
(1) Churches.
(2) Reserved.
(3) Recreational beach lots.
(4) Towers as regulated by article XXX of this chapter.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 5(5-5.4), 12-15-86; Ord. No. 120, § 4(4), 2-12-90; Ord. No. 259, § 12,
11-12-96)
State law reference--Conditional uses, M.S. § 462.3595.
Sec. 20-615. Lot requirements and setbacks.
The following minimum requirements shall be observed in an "RSF" District subject to
additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in this chapter and chapter 18:
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 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
illustrated below.
Lota Whore FrOntage la
Measured At 8etbaok Line
(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 / Flag Lots
(4) The maximum lot coverage for all structures and paved surfaces is twenty-five (25)
percent.
(5) The setbacks are as follows:
a. For front yards, thirty (30) feet.
b. For rear yards, thirty (30) feet.
Supp. No. 9 1212
ZONING § 20-632
V~ c. For side yards, ten (10) feet.
(6) The setbacks for lots served by private driveways and/or neck lots are as follows:
a. For front yard, thirty (30) feet. The front yard shall be the lot line nearest the
public r/ght-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.
ARTICLE XIII. '~-4" MIXED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Sec. 20-631. Intent.
The intent of the "R-4" District is to provide for single-family and attached residential
development at a maximum net density of four (4) dwelling units per acre.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 6(5-6-1), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-632. Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in an "R-4" District:
(1) Single-family dwellings.
(2) Two-family dwellings.
Supp. No. 9 1213
ZONING § .20-908
increased in width or depth by an additional foot over the side and rear yards required
for the highest building otherwise permitted in the district.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VI, § 10, 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-908. Yard regulations.
The following requirements qualify or supplement district regulations. Yard measurements
shall be taken from the nearest point of the wall of a building to the lot line in question, subject
to the following qualifications:
(1) Every part of a required yard or court shall be.open and unobstructed.
(2) Ayard, court, or other open space of one (1) building used to comply with the provisions
of this chapter shall not again be used as a yard, court, or other open space for another
building.
(3) Except as provided in the business, industrial, and office districts, the front yard
setback requirements shall be observed on each street side of a corner lot; provided,
however, that the remaining two (2) yards will meet the side yard setbacks.
(4) On double frontage lots, the required front yard shall be provided on both streets.
Whenever possible, structures should face the existing street.
(5) The following shall not be considered to be obstructions (variances granted from a
required setback are not entitled to the following additional encroachments):
a. Into any required front yard, or required side yard adjoining a side street lot line,
cornices, canopies, eaves, or other architectural features may project a distance
not exceeding two (2) feet, six (6) inches; fire escapes may project a distance not
exceeding four (4) feet, six (6) inches; an uncovered stair and necessary landings
may project a dista{~ce not to exceed six (6) feet, provided such stair and landing
shall not extend above the entrance floor of the building; bay windows, balconies,
~open porches and chimneys may project a distance not exceeding .three (3) feet;
unenclosed }tecks and patios may project a distance not exceeding five (5) feet and
shall not be located in a drainage and utility easement. Other canopies may be
permitted by conditional use permit.
b. The above-named features may project into any required yard adjoining an
interior lot line, subject to the limitations cited above.
c. Porches that encroach into the required front yard and which were in existence on
February 19, 1987 may be enclosed or completely rebuilt in the same location
provided that any porch that is to be completely rebuilt must have at least a
ten-foot minimum front yard.
d. Subject to the setback requirements in section 20-904, the following are permitted
in the rear yard: enclosed or open off-street parking spaces; accessory structures,
toolrooms, and similar buildings or structures for domestic storage. Balconies,
breezeways and open porches, unenclosed decks and patios, and one-story bay
windows may project into the rear yard a distance not to exceed five (5) feet.
Supp. No. 10 1233
CERTIFICATE OF .SURVEY
For. KEYLAND HOMES
PROPOSED
CARPORT-
PROPOSED
Jill, Inc.
PORCH
Page 2 of 2
[nfl 'd , -
-Lb~Odb,y~
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, MAY ~t, 2000 AT 7:00 P.M.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
690 CITY CENTER DRIVE
PROPOSAL: Variance for a Carport
APPLICANT: Tom Edstrom
LOCATION: 1834 Valley Ridge Trail N.
NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant,
Tom Edstrom, is requesting a side yard variance from the required 10' setback for the construction
of a carport located at 1834 Valley Ridge Trail N.
What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's
request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead
the public hearing through the following steps:
1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.
2. The Developer will present plans on the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is dosed and the Commission discusses project.
Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during
office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project,
please contact Cindy at 937-1900 ext. 117. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one
copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on April 20, 2000.
~Lake D~e~
JAMES M CULLEY &
~ARA B TSCHIMPERLE
1772 VALLEY RIDGE PL
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
DOUGLAS A & CINDY L MERRI
8736 VALLEY VIEW PL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
GREGG J & AMY M KLOKE
1836 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
CITY OF CHANHASSEN~
C/O SCOTT BOTCHER
690 CITY CENTER DR PO BOX 147
CHAN~S~i}N MN 55317
ALVARO J & NANCY A GOMEZ
8748. VALLEY VIEW PL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
DUANE D & MARY JO CHAMBE
1824 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
MICHAEL A & JULIE A SALENTI
1784 VALLEY RIDGE PL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
JAY & BARBARA GRIZZLE
8760 VALLEY VIEW PL
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
TIMOTHY & BRENDA MOORE
1812 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
MICHAEL J & CAROL L FELLNE
1796 VALLEY RIDGE PL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
JOHN J MOTSCHENBACHER &
KIMBERLY A MOTSCHENBA
8743 VALLEY VIEW PL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
THOMAS R & AMY B EDSTROM
1834 VALLEy~RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
ROGER STEVEN BRICHACEK &
SUSAN KAY BRICHACEK
13000 DAHLIA CIR APT
EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344
TIMOTHY A & NANCY G THUL
8729 VALLEY VIEW PL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
LYNDELL F & MARY F FREY
1822 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
DONALD & JENNIFER HARMS
1783 VALLEY RIDGE PL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
ANDY & BARBARA KAYATI
8715 VALLEY VIEW PL
CHANHASSEN MN 553!7
GREGORY S & SHELLY M SCAL
1814 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
THOR C & LYNN M HEIMDAHL
8671 VALLEY RIDGE CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
ABDALLAH A EL-SANJAK
SALWA S MATAR
1839 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
PAUL S & LAURA E GRAVES
8634 VALLEY VIEW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
LAWRENCE P & HOLLY WHITE
8657 VALLEY RIDGE CT
CHANHASSEN MN 553!7
DUANE B FREETH &
WENDY H EBERLIN
1827 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
ERIC & MELISSA NOYES
8622 VALLEY VIEW CT
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
CEASAR J CRUDUP
8712 VALLEY VIEW PL
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
TIMOTHY J & BEVERLY ANGLU
1841 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
TODD M & JONI J NELSON
8610 VALLEY VIEW CT
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
DAVID L & DANA L MARION
8724 VALLEY VIEW PL
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
DOUGLAS D FISHER &
VALERIE J BURKHART-FISHE
1848 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
DEBRA LYNN LUDFORD
8615 VALLEY VIEW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
ERIC & MELISSA NOYES
8622 VALLEY VIEW CT
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
TIMOTHY G GEEHAN
1819 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
TODD M & JONI J NELSON
8610 VALLEY VIEW CT
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
PHEAVANH SOUVANNALATH &
HATHAPHONE SOUVANNAL
1829 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
DEBRA LYNN LUDFORD
8615 VALLEY VIEW CT
CHANHASSEN MN
55317
CATS PAW INVESTMENT LLC
27705 BRYN MAWR PL-S
SHOREWOOD MN 55331
KENNETH A & MARCIA S STRA
8631 VALLEY VIEW CT
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
CITY OF CHANHASSEN --
C/O SCOTT BOTCHER
690 CITY ~CENTER DR PO BOX 147
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
JOEL K & KERI L JOHNSON
1806 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
ROBERT J & SHARON M BEDUH
1798 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
KURT & KRISTIE A MOLDENHA
1792 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
MARK K & RACHEL DANDERS
1797 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
MARK R & LAURA G JOHNSON
1807 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
MICHAEL J & MARY M YAZCEC
1813 VALLEY RIDGE TR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
Attn:
Planning Commission
City of Chanhassen
690 City Center Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
April 10, 2000
CITy
Subject:
Variance Request
1834 Valley Ridge Trail North
We request that the City of Chanhassen and the Planning Commission not grant the variance
recently requested by our next door neighbor (residing at 1834 Valley Ridge Trail North). It is
our understanding that our neighbor desires to build a "car port" like structure, next to his garage,
which would essentially be an open structure (with a roof and four poles) to be used for storing a
boat on a year-round basis.
The distance between the side of our neighbor's home and the side of our home is only
approximately 27 ½ feet at the front end which faces the street. Of the total 27 ½ feet, 15 ½ of
that distance is our neighbor's property and 12 feet is our property. It is our understanding that
our neighbor is requesting a variance to the City of Chanhassen's Code of Ordinances which
requires a 10 feet setback for side yards.
We strongly oppose the variance for the following reasons:
The already close proximity of our homes would be further impacted if the structure were
allowed. (Essentially, only 15 - 16 feet of open space would remain between our neighbor's
structure and our home).
We desire to preserve the natural beauty and design of the newer homes built in our
neighborhood and the City of Chanhassen over the past several years. One of the qualities
that attracted us to our neighborhood was that all of the homes have spacious lots and our
back yards overlook a wetland area.
The contstruction of a "car port" like structure would compromise the high quality design of
existing structures in the neighborhood, as well as directly impact our adjoining lot. In short,
such a structure is not aesthetically compatible with the area.
· We are concerned that the structure would diminish or impair the property value of our home
and other homes in the neighborhood.
· The requested variance to build a structure is a self-created hardship.
Enclosed are pictures of our home and our neighbor's home, which further illustrates the
closeness of our side yards. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Lyndell & Mary Frey
1822 Valley Ridge Trail North
Chanhassen, MN 55317
(612) 448-7470
'00 4