Email from Jeff Jewison 11-11-04
Generous. Bob
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
JefCJewison@cargill.com
Thursday, November 11, 2004 9:19 AM
Generous, Bob
23-lot sub-div proposal, planning file: 04-31
My wife and I live at 3842 Meadow CT, Chanhassen, and are VERY disappointed to hear of
this proposal behind our house. The wetlands that are being replaced with this new
development were the primary reason we purchased the house. We were told they were
"protected" wetlands and could not be developed. Apparently "protected" doesn't mean much
if there is enough money involved. We see deer and other wildlife out there nearly every
day looking out our windows and from our deck.
This development will significantly impact the value of our house in a negative way (both
market value and personal value). There is a BIG difference between having a property
that looks out to wetlands and a property that looks out to an obnoxiously large, cookie-
cutout house and cul-de-sac.
Besides these general concerns, here are specific concerns we have with the plans:
- The plans call for a cul-de-sac on the northeast corner of the development which borders
our backyard. As if this development isn't going to lower the value of. our property
enough; who in their right mind wants to buy a house with a cul-de-sac bordering their
front yard AND their backyard? Does there really HAVE to be a cul-de-sac back there?
- Drainage I runoff - runoff from existing properties drains into those wetlands.
Depending on how much that land is built up, the new development runoff may go into our
yard or at best, prevent the runoff from our yards from draining properly and cause an
accumulation.
- The properties are slated to run north and south which also puts a house very close to
our backyard (instead of having our back yard border another property's backyard). This
is an obvious attempt to cram as many units onto this land as possible without any regard
to property values, privacy, and ambiance.
Again, if this development ABSOLUTELY MUST proceed, we should at least be compensated for
the reduction in our property value. There is a BIG difference between having a property
that looks out to wetlands and a property that looks out to an obnoxiously large, cookie-
cutout house and bordered by cul-de-sacs in the front and back. Quite frankly and
honestly, we would have NEVER purchased this property if we new there could be a
development back there.
Please take this into consideration when approving this proposal and we plan on attending
the public hearing. We think it is a bad idea in general, but at a minimum, the specific
plans are terrible - it's all about getting as much money as possible from a little chunk
of land.
regards,
****************************************************
Jeff Jewison, Senior IT Business Analyst
Cargill's Corporate Financial Reporting (CFR)
Mpls, MN - USA Office Center, MIS 5
phone 952-742-7973, fax 952-742-5231
****************************************************
1