4 Req. 5ft ShorelandSetback VarCITY OF CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: 12/2/03
CC DATE:
REVIEW DEADLINE: 2/13/03
CASE #: Variance 2003-18
BY: AA
STAFF REPORT
Z
<
<
<
PROPOSAL: Request for a 5 foot shoreland setback variance
LOCATION: 6900 Utica Lane, Lot 16, Block 1, Greenwood Shores
APPLICANT:
Dale and Gloria Carlson
6900 Utica Lane
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING: Residential Single-Family (RSF)
2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential-Low Density
ACREAGE: .72 (31,434 sq ft) DENSITY: NA
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a 5 foot shoreland setback variance (70 foo
shoreland setback) from the 75 foot shoreland setback requirement for the remodel and expansion of a
169 square foot two story addition.
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
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.
LAKE LUCY
LAKE ANN
PROPOSAL SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting a 5 foot shoreland variance for the conversion and vertical expansion of a
nonconforming structure. The property is located at 6900 Utica Lane; Lot 16, Block 1, Greenwood Shores
Subdivision. The property is zoned Residential Single-Family, RSF, which permits low density single
family detached dwelling units. Lake Lucy is a Recreational Development Lake.
N
b~UU
6830
6801
6831
6850 6880
689O
689O
6806
683O
6870
Lake Lucy
6930
690O
698O
6891
6901
6960
6950
APPLICABLE REGUATIONS
DIVISION 4. NONCONFORMING USES*
Sec. 20-71. Purpose
The purpose of this division is:
(1) To recognize the existence of uses, lots, and structures which were lawful when established,
but which no longer meet all ordinance requirements;
(2) To prevent the enlargement, expansion, intensification, or extension of any nonconforming use,
building, or structure;
(3) To encourage the elimination of nonconforming uses, lots, and structures or reduce their impact
on adjacent properties.
Sec. 20-72. Nonconforming uses and structures
(a) There shall be no expansion, intensification, replacement, structural change, or relocation of
any nonconforming use or nonconforming structure except to lessen or eliminate the
nonconformity.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, any detached single-family dwelling that
is on a nonconforming lot or that is a nonconforming use or structure may be altered, or
expanded; provided however, that the nonconformity may not be increased. If a setback of a
dwelling is nonconforming, no additions may be added to the nonconforming side of the
building unless the addition meets setback requirements.
(e) Maintenance and repair of nonconforming structures is permitted. Removal or destruction of a
nonconforming structure to the extent of more than fifty (50) percent of its estimated value,
excluding land value and as determined by the city, shall terminate the right to continue the
nonconforming structure.
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 Structures
Sewered
Recreational development 75
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 of ten (10) feet from the ordinary high water level.
BACKGROUND
The Greenwood Shores subdivision was platted in 1959 with 84 lots. The subject site is a riparian lot on
Lake Lucy. The home was built in 1962, prior to the adoption of the 1972 zoning ordinance. The earliest
Shoreland Management District ordinance, that we found, dates back to 1986. The 1986 ordinance
referenced the DNR standards which require a 75 foot setback from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) level.
The existing home does not meet the 75 foot shoreland setback requirement, being only 70 feet from the
lake.
The applicant is proposing to convert the existing spa room located on the south side of the home. The
room is setback 70 feet from the OHW of Lake Lucy and is proposed to be converted into an office. The
applicant is also proposing a vertical expansion to create a second story on the existing foundation. This
vertical expansion requires a variance.
The existing home location exceeds the front and side yard setback requirements of the RSF zoning district.
It maintains a 50 foot front yard setback and a 33 foot side yard setback. There is an existing
nonconforming accessory structure located on the north side of the property, which has a side yard setback
of 1 foot. The ordinance requires a minimum of 10 feet.
ANALYSIS
Since the earliest record we located of the adoption of the Shoreland Management District ordinance was in
1986, it appears that the existing structure is a legal nonconforming structure. The applicant is required to
apply for a variance to construct any addition, which does not meet the setback requirements, as specified in
Sec 20-72 Nonconforming uses and structures:
(a) There shall be no expansion, intensification, replacement, structural change, or relocation of any
nonconforming use or nonconforming structure except to lessen or eliminate the nonconformity.
(b)
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, any detached single-family dwelling
that is on a nonconforming lot or that is a nonconforming use or structure may be altered, or
expanded provided, however, that the nonconformity may not be increased. If a setback of a
dwelling is nonconforming, no additions may be added to the nonconforming side of the
building unless the addition meets setback requirements.
The site has a 19 foot elevation change from the northeastern corner with a high point of 975 and slopes
to the west at 956 at the lake. The lower level of the home is a walk out; the second story is the main
level of the home. There are no bluffs located on the property. There is a row of pine trees at the front
property line; a willow tree near the lake; one tree on the west side of the home, which may be impacted
by the construction.
The proposed addition is located on the south side of the home. The applicant is proposing to convert the
existing spa room into an office, while adding a second story to expand the master bedroom and bath over
the existing foundation. This will not change the current 70 foot shoreland setback; however, as stated
above, Ifa setback of a dwelling is nonconforming, no additions may be added to the nonconforming
side of the building unless the addition meets setback requirements. Thus the applicant is requesting a 5
foot shoreland setback variance to add the second story on the existing foundation. The proposed
addition will not increase the nonconformity as it will be constructed on the existing footings of the
structure.
Nearly all of the neighboring properties meet the required setbacks for the RSF district, including lakeshore
properties, with the exception of the subject property, and neighboring lot, lot 19. Lot 19 was also built 70
feet from the OHW and was granted a shoreland setback variance in 1997.
Staff has reviewed properties within 500 feet and compiled the following list of variances:
File Number Property Lakeshore Variance Request Action Taken
97-7 6990 Utica Lane Yes 17 foot shoreland setback Approved
Lot 19, Block I variance for the construction of a
deck
?ii, ~ 5
Staff is recommending approval since the proposed expansion is reasonable and does not further encroach
into the required lakeshore setback.
FINDINGS
The Planning Commission 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 criterion.
Finding: The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable
use of the property for a single-family home exists on the lot. However, a portion of the existing
structure was built 5 feet into the 75 foot shoreland setback. The home was constructed in 1962,
while the earliest record of the shoreland overlay district ordinance was adopted in 1986, creating a
nonconforming structure, which makes it nearly impossible to expand the westerly half of the 41
year old home without a variance to the setback requirement.
The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other
property within the same zoning classification.
Finding: In reviewing neighboring property's surveys, many meet the 75 foot shoreland setback
requirement with the exception of the subject property and one other lot, lot 19; which also has a 70
foot shoreland setback. The subject property is unique in that it was built in 1962, with a portion of
the building encroaching 5 feet into the 75 foot setback requirement, prior to the earliest record of
the shoreland ordinance adoption in 1986.
Co
The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of
the parcel of land.
Finding: The addition will increase the value of the home; however, that is not the primary
intension of the applicant. The addition is based on making the home more functional for the
current homeowner by converting an existing room to an office and expanding the master bedroom
and bath.
d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship.
Finding: The hardship is not self-created by the homeowner; the home was built within the
shoreland setback prior to the adoption of the shoreland management district. Therefore, the house
is a nonconforming structure, requiring a variance to expand almost any portion of the home.
The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land
or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located.
Finding: The variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or
improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. The setback from the lake will
not be reduced or changed.
The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or
substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger
the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.
Finding: The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property as the addition is located within the building footprint of the existing home, nor will it
substantially increase the congestion of the public streets as it is an addition to a private residence
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion:
"The Planning Commission approves Variance #2003-18 for a 5 foot variance from the 75 foot shoreland
setback requirement as shown on the registered land survey dated checked and reviewed on March 30,
1992, and based on the findings in the staff report with the following conditions:
1) The applicant shall install a silt fence prior to any excavation if necessary.
2) The applicant shall apply for a building permit.
3) The applicant shall show the location of the existing driveway on the survey."
ATTACHMENTS
1) Application
2) Public hearing notice
3) Letter from Bill and Joanne Lambrecht dated 10/25/03
4) Survey
5) Building plans
6) Photographs of existing room to be converted
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
IN RE:
The application of Dale & Gloria Carlson, 6900 Utica Lane, Variance No. 2003-18.
On December 2, 2003, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to
consider the application of Dale and Gloria Carlson for a 5 foot shoreland setback variance.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed development which 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 RSF, Residential Single Family.
2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for residential, low density.
3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 16, Block 1, Greenwood Shores.
4. The Planning Commission shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts:
The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable
use of the property for a single-family home exists on the lot. However, a portion of the
existing structure was built 70 feet from the OHW. The home was constructed in 1962,
while the earliest record of the shoreland overlay district ordinance was adopted in 1986,
creating a nonconforming structure, which makes it nearly impossible to expand any
portion of the 41 year old home without a variance to the setback requirement. This is
comparable to neighboring properties with surveys on file with the city.
· In reviewing neighboring property's surveys, many meet the 75 foot shoreland setback
requirement, with the exception of the subject property and one other property, also
setback 70 feet from the OHW. The subject property is unique in that it was built in
1962, 5 feet into the 75 foot setback requirement, prior to the earliest record of the
shoreland ordinance adoption in 1986.
The addition will increase the value of the home; however, that is not the primary
intension of the applicant. The addition is based on making the home more functional
by converting an existing room into an office, which is permitted by code, and
expanding the master bedroom and bath.
The hardship is not self-created by the homeowner. The home was built within the
shoreland setback prior to the adoption of the shoreland management district. Therefore,
the house is a nonconforming structure, requiring a variance to expand almost any
portion of the home.
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.
The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property as the addition is located within the building footprint of the existing home, nor
will it substantially increase the congestion of the public streets as it is an addition to a
private residence.
5. The planning report Variance #2003-18, dated December 2, 2003, prepared by Angie
Auseth, et al, is incorporated herein.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission approves a 5 foot variance from the 75 foot shoreland setback requirement as
shown on the registered land survey dated, checked and reviewed March 30, 1992, prepared by Schoell
& Madison, Inc.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 2nd day of December, 2003.
ATTEST:
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
BY:
Secretary Its Chairman
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
7700 MARKET BOULEVARD
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(952) 227-1100
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
ADDRESS: & ~ O0 ~,~T'~ ~'~ L J3.~J ~
TELEPHONE (Daytime) C~5'Z- ~ ']~- ~ oo 7._-
OWNER:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE:
__ Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Conditional Use Permit
Interim Use Permit
__ Non-conforming Use Permit
__ Planned Unit Development*
__ Rezoning
__ Sign Permits
__ Sign Plan Review
Site Plan Review*
Subdivision*
__ Temporary Sales Permit
Vacation of ROW/Easements
Variance
Wetland Alteration Permit
__ Zoning Appeal
__ Zoning Ordinance Amendment
__ Notification Sign
X
__ Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost**
($50 CUP/SPR/VACNAR/VV AP/Metes
and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB)
TOTAL FEE $
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the
application.
Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews.
*Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2" X 11" reduced copy
for each plan sheet.
** Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract
NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
PROJECT NAME
LOCATION .~" [~_.j (~.¢t~z_.-~,_-: 'L-- ~
LEGAL DESORIPTION ,~?.~.~.~c~
TOTAL AOREAGE
WETLANDS PRESENT
PRESENT ZONING
YES NO
REQUESTED ZONING
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning
Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written
notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application.
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with
all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom
the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either
copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make
this application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.
The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing
requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day
extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review
extensions are approved by the applicant.
Signature of Fee Owner
Application Received on
/// Date
~.~2 C.C, Date
Fee Paid ~'~/~G!~'~'_~~' Receipt No. -L~'~ z.//~' /
The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting.
If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address.
Chanhassen Planning Commission
Chair Uli Sacchet
Steve Lillehaug
Rich Slagle
Craig Claybaugh
Bruce Feik
Kurt Papke
Bethany Tjornhom
October 19, 2003
Upon applying for a permit from the City of Chanhassen for the expansion of our bedroom over an
existing foundation we have been informed that we must first apply for a variance. Apparently this
is due to the fact that our house, built in 1962, is within 75 feet of the Lake Lucy high water mark,
thus making it a non-conforming structure.
The actual project consists of the following:
· Convert existing spa room into an office (no expansion).
Expand master bedroom over spa room's existing foundation.
· Enlarge existing bathroom in master bedroom.
We recognize that variance approvals are not the norm, but upon considering this please note that
we are not requesting further encroachment of Lake Lucy. Upon your approval we will be
requesting a permit to expand a very small master bath and bedroom that in turn wilt increase the
functionality of these rooms. We should also point out that simply changing the spa room into an
office without expansion above of it would result in a fiat roof that would be inconsistent with the
overall house design.
Thank you for your consideration on this variance request,
Dale & Gloria Carlson
6900 Utica Lane
Chanhassen MN 55317
952-474-30O2
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PROPOSED VARIANCE
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen Planning Commission will hold a
public hearing on Tuesday, December 2, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in
Chanhassen City Hall, 7700 Market Blvd. The purpose of this hearing is to consider the
application of Dale Carlson requesting a shoreland setback for the construction of an addition on
property zoned RSF and located at 6900 Utica Lane.
A plan showing the location of the proposal is available for public review at City Hall
during regular business hours. All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and
express their opinions with respect to this proposal.
Angie Auseth, Planner I
Phone: 952-227-1132
(Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on November 13, 2003)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2003 AT 7:00 P.M.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7700 MARKET BLVD.
PROPOSAL:
Shoreland setback variance
for construction of an addition
on property zoned RSF
APPLICANT: Dale Carlson
LOCATION: 6900 Utica Lane
NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant,
Dale Carlson, is requesting a shoreland setback variance for the construction of an addition on
property zoned RSF and located at 6900 Utica Lane.
What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant'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 applicant will present plans on the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the 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 Angle at 227-1132 or e-mail aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. If you choose to submit written
comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies
to the Commission.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on November 13, 2003.
City Review Procedure
Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim
Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Code
Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City
ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the
application in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting.
Staff prepares a report on the subject application. This report includes all pertinent
information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the
Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a
recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal
as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and
discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council
may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's
recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority
vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to
commercial/industrial.
Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days
unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity
may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through
the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and
scheduling for the City Council meeting.
A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for
the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding
their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested
person(s).
Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not.
Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in
the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be included in the
report, please contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification.
g :\plan",t'orms',review procedure
Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160®
BRUCE A & TAMMY A DUNCAN
6881 UTICA LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9516
DALE E & GLORIA J CARLSON
6900 UTICA LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9201
DANIEL JR & KlM SCHAITBERGER
6830 UTICA CIR
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9514
EDWARD & CAROL A JANNUSCH
6831 UTICA TER
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9557
EDWIN & CORREEN G NEWINSKI
6930 UTICA LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9201
GERALD F HOFFMANN
6830 UTICA TER
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9557
JAMES J HASTREITER JR
6990 TECUMSEH LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9543
JAMES W & JUDY A LANDKAMMER
6901 UTICA LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9516
JOAN R PRESTON
6960 TECUMSEH LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9543
KENNETH W & D EARHART
6880 UTICA LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9550
LEON & JOSEPHINE E
HENDRICKSON
6986 TECUMSEH LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9543
MICHAEL ROLAND WRAYGE
6996 TECUMSEH LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9543
PATRICK A MOHR & MAUREEN D
LORD MOHR
6890 UTICA TER
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9557
REGINA M HENDRICKSON
6980 TECUMSEH LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9543
RICHARD C & JOANNE M POTZ
6991 TECUMSEH LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9543
RICHARD D & PAULA RICE
6950 TECUMSEH LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9543
ROBERT & TANYA KlM
6870 UTICA LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9550
RONALD & JACQUELINE
MCCONNELL
6971 TECUMSEH LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9543
RONALD C & MARY ELLEN
KNUDTEN
6850 UTICA TER
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9557
SCOTT T & JOANNE L REINERTSON
6801 UTICA TER
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9557
STATE OF MINNESOTA IN TRUST
C/O AUDITOR - DNR WITHHELD
600 4TH ST E
CHASKA MN 55318-2184
STEVEN A & PATTI J CWODZlNSKI
689O UTICA LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9550
TODD J & ELIZABETH J HOFFMAN
6891 UTICA LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9516
WILLIAM B & PATRICIA C WARD
6960 UTICA LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9201
WILLIAM D LAMBRECHT & JOANNE
M LAMBRECHT
6990 UTICA LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9201
WILLIAM R & BETH L DODGE
6981 TECUMSEH LN
CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9543
RICH SLAGLE
7411 FAWN HILL ROAD
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
AVERY®
Address Labels
Laser
5160®
October 25, 2003
Chanhassen Planning Commission
Dear Com~nissioners,
We are writing to encourage you to grant the variance applied tbr by
our neighbors, Dale and Gloria Carlson, for their expanded ~naster bedroom,
bathroom and ott~ice. The Carlsons are good neighbors who work hard to
keep up their property and improve the co~nmunity as a whole.
The proposed project would not hinder the view of the lake tbr any ot'
the neighbors. It also would not put at risk the environmental quality of
Lake Lucy. The addition would be compatible with the types and sizes of
homes in our area and would be an asset to the neighborhood.
Yours truly,
..Bill & Joanne Lambrecht
6990 Utica Lanc
Chanhassen MN 553 l 7
952-470-4216
1
I
,/