PC Staff Report 1-5-21PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF
REPORT
Tuesday,January 5,2021
Subject Consider a Request for Variances to Modify a Non-Conforming Structure by Adding a Second
Story to An Existing Home Located at 9243 Lake Riley Boulevard
Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No:B.5.
Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,Associate
Planner
File No:Planning Case No.2021-05
PROPOSED MOTION:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to intensify a nonconforming
structure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front,side,and shoreland setbacks,subject
to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.”
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant is requesting a variance to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story to the existing
home.Since portions of the home’s footprint are within the required front,side,and shoreland setbacks a variance is
required.They have stated that the intent of the variance is to modernize the home and add additional living space.
The applicant has stated that the home is a 1979 rambler which requires significant renovations.The applicant has
noted that the property’s small lot size,setbacks,and easements mean that any addition expanding the home’s footprint
would require significant setback variances.Additionally,the property’s existing improvements already utilized 24.4
percent of the property’s 25 percent lot cover limit which means that any change to the footprint would also require a
lot cover variance.For these reasons the applicant feels that expanding upwards is the most responsible and least
impactful way to modernize and expand the home.Finally,they believe that the proposed plan is consistent with the
existing character of the neighborhood and represents and improvement to the existing structure.
Historically,it has been the city’s position that the primary intent of the nonconforming use ordinance,as it pertains to
single-family residential structures,is to prevent further horizontal encroachment into required setbacks.It has been
staff’s practice to support variance requests to intensify these types of nonconforming structures by adding a second
story so long as the addition is under the zoning district’s maximum height,does not create new impervious surface,and
does not increase the horizontal encroachment of the nonconforming structure.The proposed project meets all of these
criteria and staff agrees that it is the only viable way to improve the property without requesting more extensive and
impactful variances,for these reasons staff recommends approval of the requested variance.
A full discussion can be found in the attached staff report.
APPLICANT
PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREPORTTuesday,January 5,2021SubjectConsideraRequest for Variances to Modify a Non-Conforming Structure by Adding aSecondStorytoAnExistingHomeLocatedat9243LakeRileyBoulevardSectionPUBLICHEARINGSItemNo:B.5.Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,AssociatePlanner File No:Planning Case No.2021-05PROPOSEDMOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to intensify anonconformingstructurebyaddingasecondstorymeetingtheexistingnonconformingfront,side,and shoreland setbacks,subjecttotheConditionsofApprovalandadoptstheattachedFindingsofFactsandDecision.”SUMMARY OFREQUESTTheapplicantisrequestinga variance to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story to theexistinghome.Since portions of the home’s footprint are within the required front,side,and shoreland setbacks a varianceisrequired.They have stated that the intent of the variance is to modernize the home and add additional living space.The applicant has stated that the home is a 1979 rambler which requires significant renovations.The applicanthasnotedthattheproperty’s small lot size,setbacks,and easements mean that any addition expanding the home’sfootprintwouldrequiresignificantsetbackvariances.Additionally,the property’s existing improvements already utilized 24.4percentoftheproperty’s 25 percent lot cover limit which means that any change to the footprint would also requirealotcovervariance.For these reasons the applicant feels that expanding upwards is the most responsible andleastimpactfulwaytomodernizeandexpandthehome.Finally,they believe that the proposed plan is consistent withtheexistingcharacteroftheneighborhoodandrepresentsandimprovementtotheexistingstructure.Historically,it has been the city’s position that the primary intent of the nonconforming use ordinance,as it pertainstosingle-family residential structures,is to prevent further horizontal encroachment into required setbacks.It hasbeenstaff’s practice to support variance requests to intensify these types of nonconforming structures by adding asecondstorysolongastheadditionisunderthezoningdistrict’s maximum height,does not create new impervious surface,anddoesnotincreasethehorizontalencroachmentofthenonconformingstructure.The proposed project meets all ofthesecriteriaandstaffagreesthatitistheonlyviablewaytoimprovethepropertywithoutrequestingmoreextensiveandimpactfulvariances,for these reasons staff recommends approval of the requested variance.A full discussion can be found in the attached staff report.
APPLICANT
Alma,LLC 2500 Shadywood Road,Suite 750,Orono,MN 55331
SITE INFORMATION
PRESENT ZONING:RSF”Single-Family Residential District
LAND USE:Residential Low Density
ACREAGE:29 acres
DENSITY:NA
APPLICATION REGULATIONS
Chapter 20,Article II,Division 3.Variances
Chapter 20,Article II,Division 4.Nonconforming Uses
Chapter 20,Article VII.Shoreland Management District.
Chapter 20,Article XII,RSF”Single-Family Residential District
Section 20-615,Lot Requirements and Setbacks.
BACKGROUND
In 1977,the city issued a 9-foot front yard setback,7.5-foot shoreland setback,and sub 20,000 square-foot lot size
variance to permit a single-family home on the site.
In June of 1979,the city issued a building permit for a single-family home.
In 1993,the city issued a 7.9-foot front yard setback and 9-foot shoreland setback variance to permit an addition on the
site.
In October of 1993,the city issued a building permit for an addition.
Several permits for interior work,re-roofing,and other maintenance are also on file with the city.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission,acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments,approve the variance
request to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front,side,
and shoreland setbacks,subject to the following conditions,and adopt the attached Findings of Facts and Decision:
1.A building permit must be obtained prior to construction.
2.Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed building/structure meets all
requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code additional comments or requirements may be required after
plan review.
3.The home’s footprint must not be increased beyond what is shown in the submitted survey dated December 2,
2020.
4.Eaves and other architectural elements may project as shown on the plans dated December 3,2020.
5.The addition must substantially conform to the submitted plans dated December 3,2020.
PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREPORTTuesday,January 5,2021SubjectConsidera Request for Variances to Modify a Non-Conforming Structure by Adding aSecondStorytoAnExistingHomeLocatedat9243LakeRileyBoulevardSectionPUBLICHEARINGSItemNo:B.5.Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,AssociatePlanner File No:Planning Case No.2021-05PROPOSEDMOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to intensify anonconformingstructurebyaddingasecondstorymeetingtheexistingnonconformingfront,side,and shoreland setbacks,subjecttotheConditionsofApprovalandadoptstheattachedFindingsofFactsandDecision.”SUMMARY OFREQUESTTheapplicantisrequestinga variance to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story to theexistinghome.Since portions of the home’s footprint are within the required front,side,and shoreland setbacks a varianceisrequired.They have stated that the intent of the variance is to modernize the home and add additional living space.The applicant has stated that the home is a 1979 rambler which requires significant renovations.The applicanthasnotedthattheproperty’s small lot size,setbacks,and easements mean that any addition expanding the home’sfootprintwouldrequiresignificantsetbackvariances.Additionally,the property’s existing improvements already utilized 24.4percentoftheproperty’s 25 percent lot cover limit which means that any change to the footprint would also requirealotcovervariance.For these reasons the applicant feels that expanding upwards is the most responsible andleastimpactfulwaytomodernizeandexpandthehome.Finally,they believe that the proposed plan is consistent withtheexistingcharacteroftheneighborhoodandrepresentsandimprovementtotheexistingstructure.Historically,it has been the city’s position that the primary intent of the nonconforming use ordinance,as it pertainstosingle-family residential structures,is to prevent further horizontal encroachment into required setbacks.It hasbeenstaff’s practice to support variance requests to intensify these types of nonconforming structures by adding asecondstorysolongastheadditionisunderthezoningdistrict’s maximum height,does not create new impervious surface,anddoesnotincreasethehorizontalencroachmentofthenonconformingstructure.The proposed project meets all ofthesecriteriaandstaffagreesthatitistheonlyviablewaytoimprovethepropertywithoutrequestingmoreextensiveandimpactfulvariances,for these reasons staff recommends approval of the requested variance.A full discussion can be found in the attached staff report.APPLICANTAlma,LLC 2500 Shadywood Road,Suite 750,Orono,MN55331SITEINFORMATIONPRESENTZONING:RSF”Single-Family ResidentialDistrictLANDUSE:Residential LowDensityACREAGE:29 acresDENSITY:NAAPPLICATIONREGULATIONSChapter20,Article II,Division 3.VariancesChapter20,Article II,Division 4.NonconformingUsesChapter20,Article VII.Shoreland Management District.Chapter 20,Article XII,RSF”Single-Family ResidentialDistrictSection20-615,Lot Requirements and Setbacks.BACKGROUNDIn1977,the city issued a 9-foot front yard setback,7.5-foot shoreland setback,and sub 20,000 square-foot lotsizevariancetopermitasingle-family home on the site.In June of 1979,the city issued a building permit for a single-family home.In 1993,the city issued a 7.9-foot front yard setback and 9-foot shoreland setback variance to permit an addition onthesite.In October of 1993,the city issued a building permit for an addition.Several permits for interior work,re-roofing,and other maintenance are also on file with the city.RECOMMENDATIONStaffrecommendsthePlanning Commission,acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments,approve thevariancerequesttointensifyanonconformingstructurebyaddingasecondstorymeetingtheexistingnonconforming front,side,and shoreland setbacks,subject to the following conditions,and adopt the attached Findings of Facts and Decision:1.A building permit must be obtained prior to construction.2.Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed building/structure meetsallrequirementsoftheMinnesotaStateBuildingCodeadditionalcommentsorrequirementsmayberequiredafterplanreview.3.The home’s footprint must not be increased beyond what is shown in the submitted survey dated December 2,2020.4.Eaves and other architectural elements may project as shown on the plans dated December 3,2020.5.The addition must substantially conform to the submitted plans dated December 3,2020.
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report
Findings of Fact Approval)
Variance Document
Development Review Application
Narrative
Survey
Proposed Plan
Affidavit of Mailing
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: January 5, 2021
CC DATE: January 25, 2021
REVIEW DEADLINE: February 2, 2021
CASE #: PC 2021-05
BY: MYW
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting a variance to add a second story to their existing home. Portions of
the house’s foot print encroach 10.9 feet into the front setback, .4 feet into the east side yard
setback, 11 feet into the shoreland setback, and 2.5 feet into a sanitary sewer easement. The
applicant is not proposing increasing the home’s foot print and the proposed second story would
increase the building’s height to approximately 22.8 feet, significantly under the district’s 35 foot
maximum height. Due to the fact that portions of the proposed second story are within required
setbacks, the proposal intensifies an existing nonconforming use and requires a variance.
LOCATION: 9243 Lake Riley Boulevard
APPLICANT: Alma, LLC
2500 Shadywood Road, Suite #750
Orono, MN 55331
OWNER: Steve Galleger
9243 Lake Riley Boulevard
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING: “RSF” – Single-Family Residential District
2040 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density
ACREAGE: .29 acres DENSITY: NA
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING:
The city’s discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed
project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The city has a relatively
high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from
established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
PROPOSED MOTION:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to intensify a
nonconforming structure by adding a second story meeting the existing nonconforming front, side,
and shoreland setbacks, subject to the Conditions of Approval and adopts the attached Findings of
Facts and Decision.”
9243 Lake Riley Blvd
January 5, 2021
Page 2
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting a variance to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second
story to the existing home. Since portions of the home’s footprint are within the required front,
side, and shoreland setbacks a variance is required. They have stated that the intent of the
variance is to modernize the home and add additional living space.
The applicant has stated that the home is a 1979 rambler which requires significant renovations.
The applicant has noted that the property’s small lot size, setbacks, and easements mean that any
addition expanding the home’s footprint would require significant setback variances.
Additionally, the property’s existing improvements already utilized 24.4 percent of the
property’s 25 percent lot cover limit which means that any change to the footprint would also
require a lot cover variance. For these reasons the applicant feels that expanding upwards is the
most responsible and least impactful way to modernize and expand the home. Finally, they
believe that the proposed plan is consistent with the existing character of the neighborhood and
represents and improvement to the existing structure.
Historically, it has been the city’s position that the primary intent of the nonconforming use
ordinance as it pertains to single-family residential structures is to prevent further horizontal
encroachment into required setbacks. It has been staff’s practice to support variance requests to
intensify these types of nonconforming structures by adding a second story so long as the
addition is under the zoning district’s maximum height, does not create new impervious surface,
and does not increase the horizontal encroachment of the nonconforming structure. The proposed
project meets all of these criteria and staff agrees that it is the only viable way to improve the
property without requesting more extensive and impactful variances, for these reasons staff
recommends approval of the requested variance.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3. Variances
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 4. Nonconforming Uses
Chapter 20, Article VII. Shoreland Management District.
Chapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” Single-Family Residential District
Section 20-615, Lot Requirements and Setbacks.
BACKGROUND
In 1977, the city issued a 9-foot front yard setback, 7.5-foot shoreland setback, and sub 20,000
square foot lot size variance to permit a single-family home on the site.
In June of 1979, the city issued a building permit for a single-family home.
In 1993, the city issued a 7.9-foot front yard setback and 9-foot shoreland setback variance to permit
an addition on the site.
9243 Lake Riley Blvd
January 5, 2021
Page 3
In October of 1993, the city issued a building permit for an addition.
Several permits for interior work, re-roofing, and other maintenance are also on file with the city.
SITE CONSTRAINTS
Zoning Overview
The property is zoned Single-Family Residential District and is located within the Shoreland
Management District. This zoning classification requires riparian lots to be a minimum of 20,000
square feet, have front and rear yard setbacks of 30 feet, side yard setbacks of 10 feet, a
shoreland setback of 75 feet, and limits parcels to a maximum of 25 percent lot cover.
Residential structures are limited to 35 feet in height, and properties are allowed one water-
oriented accessory structure up to 250 square feet in size within the 75-foot shoreland setback.
The property is also encumbered by a 15 foot sanitary sewer easement.
The lot is 12,569 square feet with 3,068 square feet (24.4 percent) of lot cover. The existing
home has a nonconforming 19.1-foot front yard, 9.6-foot east side yard, and 64-foot shoreland
setbacks. The house has an existing deck that appears to have a nonconforming 66.9-foot
shoreland setback. The west side of the home encroaches approximately 2.5 feet into a sanitary
sewer easement. The house and other features appear to meet all other requirements of the City
Code.
Bluff Creek Corridor
This is not encumbered by the Bluff Creek Overlay District.
Bluff Protection
There are no bluffs on the property.
Floodplain Overlay
This property is not within a floodplain.
Shoreland Management
The property is located within a Shoreland Protection District. This district requires a 75-foot
structure setback from the lake’s ordinary high water level and limits the property to a maximum
impervious surface coverage of 25 percent.
Wetland Protection
There is not a wetland located in the development site.
9243 Lake Riley Blvd
January 5, 2021
Page 4
NEIGHBORHOOD
Shore Acres
The plat for this area was recorded in July
of 1951 and it predates the establishment of
the City of Chanhassen. The plat created
numerous small lots that do not meet the
city’s current minimum lot area and
dimension requirements. Many of these lots
were subsequently consolidated under a
single Property Identification Number (PIN)
in order to create larger combined parcels,
though most of these parcels still fail to
meet minimum lot area and dimension
requirements.
Homes in this area date from the 1950s to
the present and there is a fairly eclectic mix
of housing styles including both single and
two story homes. On some properties, the
original homes have been replaced with
newer construction, and additions and
remodels are common. Many properties
have received one or more variances and
most of the properties appear to have
nonconforming elements.
Variances within 500 feet:
331 Deerfoot Trail (PC 1997-06): 10’ front setback (pool) – Approved
340 Deerfoot Trail (PC 1983-04): 7.33’ rear setback (porch/deck) – Approved
361 Deerfoot Trail (PC 1997-03: 1.6’ front setback (deck) – Approved
9217 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1998-06): 7’ front setback (addition) – Approved
PC 2004-19): 7’ side setback (addition) – Approved
9221 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1992-02): 14’ front setback, 6.5’ side setback, 7% lot cover
detached garage) – Approved
PC 2003-07): 6.66’ west side setback, 5’ east side setback, 18’ shoreland
setback, sub 20,000 sq. ft. lot area, 55’ lot frontage, 38’ lake frontage
rebuild house) – Approved
9243 Lake Riley Blvd
January 5, 2021
Page 5
9225 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1996-09): 3’ east side setback, 5’ west side setback, 33’ shoreland
setback, 25% lot cover (house) – Approved
9227 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1983-10): 6’ side setback, 2.5’ side setback (addition) – Approved
9231 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1997-13): 17.8% lot cover (addition) – Withdrawn
9235 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1981-07): lot size, lot frontage, shoreland and side setback (replat) –
Approved
PC 1986-01): 25’ south shoreland setback, 40’ west shoreland setback
house) – Approved
9239 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1981-07): lot size, lot frontage, shoreland and side setback (replat) –
Approved
PC 1982-09): 5’ side setback, 42’ shoreland setback, 50’ lot frontage,
sub 20,000 sq. ft. lot (house) – Approved
9241 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1976-03): 20’ front setback, 5’ side setback (house) – Approved
9243 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1977-23): 9’ front setback, 7.5’ shoreland setback, sub 20,000 sq. ft.
lot (house) – Approved
PC 1993-08): 7.9’ front setback and 9’ shoreland setback (addition) –
Approved
9247 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1989-01): 14’ front setback, 4.5’ west side setback, 7’ shoreland
setback (house) – Approved
9249 Lake Riley Blvd. (PC 1999-14): 18’ shoreland setback (detached garage) – Approved
9251 Kiowa Trail (PC 1977-12): from sewer moratorium for lots less than 2.5 acres – Denied
PC 1977-13): appeal of PC 1977-12 - Denied
9243 Lake Riley Blvd
January 5, 2021
Page 6
ANALYSIS
Intensifying Nonconformities
The applicant’s home encroaches
into three of the property’s
required setbacks. It extends .4
feet into the 10-foot east side yard
setback, 10.9 feet into the 30-foot
front yard setback, and 11 feet into
the 75-foot shoreland setback. The
property had received variances in
1977 and 1993, respectively,
allowing for a 9-foot front yard
and 7.5-foot shoreland
encroachment and for a 7.9-foot
front yard and 9-foot shoreland
encroachment. It is likely that the
discrepancies between the
setbacks approved by these
variances and what was found
during the December 2, 2020
survey are the result of either
errors during construction or improvements in survey methodology. The home also encroaches
approximately 2.5 feet into a sanitary sewer easement. Since the property has existed with its
present footprint since 1993 and all required permits were applied for and approved, the home is
considered a legal nonconforming structure.
Nonconforming structures are regulated by Sections 20-71 and 20-72 of the City Code. Section
20-71 of the City Code explains the intent of the nonconforming use ordinance as:
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; and
3) To encourage the elimination of nonconforming uses, lots and structures or reduce their
impact on adjacent properties.
Subsequent sections of the city’s nonconforming use ordinance permit the continuation,
replacement, maintenance, and improvement, but not expansion of nonconforming uses, Sec. 20-
72(a), and require that additions to nonconforming single-family dwellings meet setback
requirements, Sec. 20-72(d). When evaluating variance requests for additions to nonconforming
homes, staff examines the extent to which the requested variance deviates from the stated intent
9243 Lake Riley Blvd
January 5, 2021
Page 7
and provisions of the nonconforming use ordinance and attempts to balance this with the
variance finding’s practical difficulties and reasonable use standards.
In this instance, while the
home’s location on the lot is
nonconforming, its use, a
single-family residence, is
the desired use for the
zoning district. Although the
structure does encroach into
required setbacks beyond
what is permitted by the
issued variances, the
discrepancies are fairly minor and are not out of keeping with variances granted to similar
properties or other nonconforming structures within the neighborhood. Importantly, the
applicant’s proposal maintains the home’s existing footprint and would not increase any of the
nonconforming setbacks.
The applicant has stated that they are
requesting this variance because the
existing house does not provide enough
space for their family. The existing house
has two bedrooms and two bathrooms with
approximately 1,700 square feet of living
space, considerably smaller than many
homes within the city. Due to the
substandard size of the lot, it would not be
possible to increase the home’s footprint
without requesting additional setback
variances as well as a lot cover variance.
Even if the house was demolished and a
new home constructed, there is no potential
placement on the lot that would allow a
larger new home to be constructed without
variances, and it is almost certain that a
two-story structure would be built to
minimize the extent of those variances and
amount of lot cover. Finally, staff investigated the possibility of adding a second story to the
home that conformed to the required setbacks and found that only a 16 foot wide second story
would be permitted, as shown in the graphic to the left. Staff believes this would be too narrow
to provide a reasonable alternative for increasing the home’s living space.
Given that the applicant’s desire to increase the home’s living space is reasonable and that the
city does not believe it would be desirable to grant the variances required to expand the home’s
footprint, staff agrees with the applicant’s position that expanding upwards is the least impactful
Setback, Variances, and Nonconformities (in feet)
Required
1977
Var.
1993
Var. Existing Discrepancy
Front 30 21 22.1 19.1 1.9
E. Side 10 10 10 9.6 0.4
W. Side 10 10 10 15.1 0
Easement 15 15 15 12.5 2.5
Shoreland 75 67.5 66 64 2
9243 Lake Riley Blvd
January 5, 2021
Page 8
way to improve the property. Staff does not believe that the proposed second story’s relatively
modest 22.8 feet of building height, significantly under the zoning district’s 35 foot maximum, is
excessive or that it would negatively impact surrounding properties. For these reasons staff
supports the requested variance.
Impact on Neighborhood
Shore Acres is an older subdivision with an eclectic mix of home styles from various decades
where most homes have either received a variance or are nonconforming structures. A visual
survey of Lake Riley Boulevard shows a roughly even split between single-story and two-story
homes. Generally speaking, the older homes appears to be of single story design with newer
homes featuring a second story. As the older housing stock is updated, staff expects the
neighborhood’s proportion of two story homes to increase.
The applicant’s proposed second story addition does not feature heavily peaked roofs and is well
under the district’s 35-foot height limit with a proposed height of 22.8 feet. While any increase in
height does increase the visual mass of the home, this proposal does not alter the footprint of the
home and is not expected to negatively impact any of the surrounding homes or environmental
features. Overall the proposal appears to be consistent with the exiting character of the
neighborhood and represents a meaningful improvement to the building’s existing façade.
Existing Façade Proposed Façade
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments,
approve the variance request to intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story
meeting the existing nonconforming front, side, and shoreland setbacks, subject to the following
conditions, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision:
1. A building permit must be obtained prior to construction.
2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed
building/structure meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code;
additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review.
9243 Lake Riley Blvd
January 5, 2021
Page 9
3. The home’s footprint must not be increased beyond what is shown in the submitted
survey dated December 2, 2020.
4. Eaves and other architectural elements may project as shown on the plans dated
December 3, 2020.
5. The addition must substantially conform to the submitted plans dated December 3, 2020.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings of Fact and Decision (Approval)
2. Variance Document (Approval)
3. Development Review Application
4. Variance Request Narrative
5. Survey
6. Proposed Plan
7. Affidavit of Mailing of Public Hearing Notice
g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-05 9243 lake riley boulevard\staff report_9243 lake riley blvd_var.docx
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
APPROVAL)
IN RE:
Application of Alma, LLC, on behalf of Steve Galleger, for a variance to expand a
nonconforming home by adding a second story on a property zoned Single-Family Residential
District (RSF) - Planning Case 2021-05.
On January 5, 2021, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and
mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Single-Family Residential District (RSF).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density.
3. The legal description of the property is:
Lots 38 and 39, Shore Acres.
4. Variance Findings – Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance:
a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan.
Finding: It is the intent of the city’s nonconforming use ordinance to allow for the
maintenance and replacement of nonconforming structures, but not their expansion. The
nonconforming use ordinance specifically requires that additions to nonconforming
structures meet city setbacks. At its core, the nonconforming use ordinance exists to
prevent the expansion of existing nonconformities and encourage their eventual removal.
In this case, the existing use is the same as the desired use (i.e. a single-family home), so
granting the requested variance would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Additionally, it is extremely unlikely that any single-family home of a modern design
could be placed on the lot without requesting variances at least as extensive as the
existing structure’s non-conformities, which means that there is no realistic scenario
wherein this property is brought into compliance with the district’s setbacks. Since the
proposed expansion would maintain the home’s existing footprint and not expand the
2
house’s horizontal encroachment into the required setbacks, granting a variance to allow
the addition of a second story does not violated the intent of the non-conforming use
ordinance.
It is also the intent of the Code to limit the extent of variances granted to the minimum
required to address a practical difficulty. Any expansion of the home’s footprint would
require the applicant to request larger and more impactful variances than what is
currently being proposed, including a variance to the property’s lot cover limit. Granting
a less impactful variance to permit the vertical expansion of the structure is in harmony
with the intent of the zoning code.
b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical
difficulties" as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property
owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter.
Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight
for solar energy systems.
Finding: The applicant’s proposal to increase living space by adding a second story is
reasonable given the size and configuration of the existing home. The height of the
applicant’s proposed second story is well below the zoning district’s maximum height;
however, the home’s nonconforming footprint means that a second level cannot be added
without a variance, since the existing placement means that any second story built outside
of the required setbacks would be too narrow to provide a viable option for increasing the
home’s living space. Finally, the house’s placement on the lot means that no expansion of
the footprint is possible without requesting more impactful variances.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The plight of the landowner is due to the substandard size of the lot and
nonconforming status of the existing structure.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: Shore Acres is an older subdivision with an eclectic mix of homes from
various decades where most homes have either received a variance or are nonconforming
structures. A visual survey of Lake Riley Boulevard shows a roughly even split between
single-story and two-story homes. Generally speaking, the older homes appear to be of
single-story design with newer homes featuring a second story. As the older housing
stock is updated, staff expects the neighborhood’s proportion of two-story homes to
increase.
The applicant’s proposed second story addition does not feature heavily peaked roofs and
is well under the district’s 35-foot height limit with a proposed height of 22.8 feet. While
3
any increase in height does increase the visual mass of the home, this proposal does not
alter the footprint of the home and is not expected to negatively impact any of the
surrounding homes or environmental features. Overall, the proposal appears to be
consistent with the exiting character of the neighborhood and represents a meaningful
improvement to the building’s existing façade.
f. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
Finding: This does not apply to this request.
5. The planning report #2021-05, dated January 5, 2021, prepared by MacKenzie Young-
Walters, is incorporated herein.
DECISION
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to
intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story meeting the existing
nonconforming front, side, and shoreland setbacks, subject to the Conditions of Approval and
adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.”
1. A building permit must be obtained prior to construction.
2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed
building/structure meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code,
additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review.
3. The home’s footprint must not be increased beyond what is shown in the submitted
survey dated December 2, 2020.
4. Eaves and other architectural elements may project as shown on the plans dated
December 3, 2020.
5. The addition must substantially conform to the submitted plans dated December 3, 2020.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 5th day of January, 2021.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
Steven Weick, Chairman
g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-05 9243 lake riley boulevard\findings of fact and decision 9243 lake riley blvd (approval).doc
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
VARIANCE 2021-05
1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby
grants the following variance:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves the variance request to
intensify a nonconforming structure by adding a second story meeting the existing
nonconforming front, side, and shoreland setbacks.
2. Property. The variance is for a property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County,
Minnesota, and legally described as Lots 38 and 39, Shore Acres.
3. Conditions. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. A building permit must be obtained prior to construction.
2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed
building/structure meets all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code,
additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review.
3. The home’s footprint must not be increased beyond what is shown in the submitted
survey dated December 2, 2020.
4. Eaves and other architectural elements may project as shown on the plans dated
December 3, 2020.
5. The addition must substantially conform to the submitted plans dated December 3, 2020.
4. Lapse. If within one (1) year of the issuance of this variance the allowed construction has not
been substantially completed, this variance shall lapse.
2
Dated: January 5, 2021 CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
SEAL) Elise Ryan, Mayor
AND:
Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,
2021 by Elise Ryan, Mayor, and Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager, of the City of
Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to
authority granted by its City Council.
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
952) 227-1100
g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-05 9243 lake riley boulevard\variance document 21-05.doc
Doo.Sign En elope lD: 9209FE02-8CA7403343F7-871 868016F1 E
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
D
submittat Date: L2 42020
CITY OT CIIAI'IIIASSXI'I
Variance E Wefland Alteration Permit
Easements ( easements) E'
TOTAL FEE. ts61.00
APPLICATION FOR OEVELOPMENT REVIEW
o",", 1tS:lll CC Date: I )<JI 60-Day Review Date
200
3 oer address
37 addresses)
apply).................... ......-.-........... $50 per document
E lnterim Use Permit f] Site Plan Agreement
Reter to the apptupdate Arylicatkn Checldist tor equhed submiltal iqlontatbn that iNd ac].Enpany this applbalion)
Comprehensive Plan tunendment......................... $600 E Subdivision (SUB)
E Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers..... $ 100 ! Create 3 lots or less ........................................ $300
Create over 3 |ots.......................$600 + $15 per lor
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) [_ tots)
E Single-Family Residence .................. . . ........ $325 fl Metes & Bounds (Z fotsl __.............................. $3OODAltOthers..-.-... .................. $425 ! consotidate Lots..._.......................................... $150
rnrerim use permir(rup) E :i:iffii:i:::Tlll...:.:........:....:.:....::::.::::....::3133Dlnconiunctionwithsingte-Family Residence.. $325 " irnctuoes g+so escrow for attomey costs).
E All Others........ .................. $425 :eaaru,*ot"*,or r.y be required ro. other appticatbns
Rezoning (REZ)
though the developrnent contract'
E Planned Unit Development (PUD).................. $750 D Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (VAC)........ $300
E Minor Amendment to existing PUD................. $100 (Additimal recording fees mav applv)
E All others........ ......... ....'. $500 E variance (vAR)... ... ..... ................................ g2oo
sign Ptan Review................................................... $150 ! werand Arteration permit (wAp)
Site Plan Review (SPR) E Single-Family Residence............................... $150
E eoministrative.. ....-......................................... $1oo E lrtt otrers........ .........."" $275
tr
3i#i'fi"[1'f.HTJ,?iJ]S,;;;;;;;il;;llo' ! zoninsAppear """ $roo
thousand square feet). E zoning ordinance Amendment (zoA)................. $500'
lnclude number of q&q[@ employees: _
lnclude number of @! employees:
E Residentiat Distrias-.....................-------- SsOO !9IE: l lrcn multicle +Dlicetions are proceas€d concurr6ntv'
Plus $5 per dwetling ,nit f- ,nit"i
thc appropdate fr€ Ehall b6 cha'ged for eac+l applictllon'
E Notification Sign (city to install and remove) ........................
@ Property Owners' List within 500' (city to geneEte afrer p.e-applicatbn meeting) ...
Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that
D Conditional Use Permit
D Vacation
E Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.)Etr
Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply)
Section 2: Required lnformation
Description of Proposal: Add 2nd Story and New RooI Structure to existing home tooFrint
9243 Lake RileyBlvdPropertyAddressorLocation:
Parcel #: 257950220
Total Acreage:
Present Zoning
Legal Description Section 24, Township 1 16, Range 023
o.29 Wetlands Present?Z ves E tto
Single-Family Residential District (RSF)Requested Zoning Single-Family Residential District (RSF)
Select One Requested Land Use Designati on. Selecl One
Residential
COMT,IUNITY DEVELOP ENT DEPARTi'ENT
Planning Oivision - 7700 Market Boulevard
Mailing Address - P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 553'17
Phone'. (952) 227-1100 / Fax: (9521227-1110
Present Land Use Designation:
Existing Use of Property:
Echeck box i separate nanative is attached.
Dodsign En elope lO: 9209FE02-8CA74033€3F7-871868016F1E
Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant lnformation
APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as applicant, represent to have obtained
authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to
the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal priod. lf this application has not been signed by
the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. 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 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. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.
Alma Homes, LLC
sis
Name
Address:2500 Shadywood Road, Suite #750
City/State/Zip: Orono, MN 55331
Email: Ethan@almahomesmn.com
Contact. Ethan Kindseth
Phone: (612) 741-9069
Cell:
Fax:
Date: r2/3/202O
qon6"1. Steve Galleger
Phone: (952) 937-0321
cel: (952) 258-3936
Fax: (952) 937-0321
Contact
Phone:
Cell:
Fax:
nature: I l-,,.i,. *wlur
PROPERW OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as property owner, have tull legal capacity to, and hereby do,
authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those
conditions, subject only to the righl to obiect at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep mysetf 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. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are Eue and conect.
SteveGallegerName
9243 Lake Riley Blvd
City/State/Zip: Chanhassen, MN 55317
Email: gallegersp@aol.com
Address:
ciry/stare/zip:
Email:
sis nr1rr". Steve Galleger DEdJIY sq.r.d ry sk Gd.os
olE a 11 13 r0 564]]5rD',Date:111'18t20
This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by
applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist
and mnfer with the Planning Department to determine the specmc ordinance and applicable procedural
requirements and fees.
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A
wriften notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application.
PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable)
Name:
E Properly owner Via: E Email
E Applicant Via: E Email
Engineer Via: E Email
E other via: E Emait
t'rtailed Paper Copy
E laaiua Paper copy
E Maileo Paper copy
ttaited Paper Copy
Who should receive copies of staff reports?tOther Contact lnformation:
Name
City/State/Zip:
Email:
INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your
device. PRINT FORM and deliver to city along with required documents and payment. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital
copy to the city for processing.
PRINT FORM
Address:
Section4: Notification lnformation
Address:
SAVE FORU SUBMIT FORM
ALMA HOMES
DESTGN I BUILD I RENOVATE
The Applicants recently purchased this property with the hopes of updating the house and structure to
accommodate their family's needs. They come into this at a great disadvantage as they are starting out
with an existing structure that is noncompliant with utility easements, front yard setbacks, side yard
setbacks and OHW setbacks. They are currently compliant, albeit marginally, with the impervious
surface requirements for this neighborhood at 24.4% hardcover. ln light of these obstacles, the
applicant has worked hard to achieve a plan to remodel the home in such a manner as is allowable
without a variance requirement. lnevitably the resounding conclusion is that it is almost impossible to
achieve the desired additional living space without seeking variance approval.
This variance request is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Chapter and also
consistent with the comprehensive plan. We are starting with a structure that is non-compliant with
numerous setbacks. The existing structure is dilapidated and in need ofserious major updating or
complete demolition. We are looking to maintain the existing footprint and add on to the structure
vertically to accommodate our clients' living needs for their family.
The Applicant's intent is to improve the quality ofthe Lake Riley Blvd neighborhood, updating a
neglected 1979 home with a home that is in harmony and consistent with current style homes on the
street. The requested variance is to allow a second story to be added which would mirror the same
footprint as the main floor footprint. This approved variance would allow the homeowner to maximize
the potential square footage while respecting the intent of other stated variances. lt is also allowin8 the
Applicant to execute a comprehensive renovation plan that fits well other homes on the lake. The
practical difficulties leading to this requested variance is directly correlated to the small size of lot which
limits the flexibility to improve the property to a level equal to similar homes on lake Riley 8lvd.
Mfi Litr:nx #8C72fi)74 612-790-7t\61)rr* rr .alntahorttcsnt n.tlnt
Applicant owns a home on Lake Riley that is a late 70s built, rambler style home with a crawl space
under the main house foundation. Applicant is seeking a variance to remodel their home and add a
second story to the existing structure following the existing structural footprint of the home. Numerous
expert opinions and design options have led us to the conclusion of this beinB the least invasive method
to meet the client's spatial needs in light ofthe existing zoning restrictions in place.
ALMA HOMES
DESICN I BUILD I RENOVATE
While this variance request is not based on economic considerationt it is b€lieved that this approved
variance would greatly improve the essential character ofthe locality and be an additional catalyst to
increasing home values for the neighborhood.
The restrictions that we are facing in the proposed project are not a result of a condition caused by the
property owner. These are pre-existing conditions that existed when the property owner acquired the
property. We are askinS for consideration in this matter as the practical difficulties inherent to the
location, size and shape of the lot, combined with the existing structural footprint in relation to the
easements and setbacks make any sort of footprint expansion impossible leaving the only reasonable
alternative to expand the structure up.
The proposed plans are intended to compliment the other existing homes in the neighborhood and in no
way alter the essential character of the locality.
Ethan Kindseth
Alma Homes, LLC
MN Licerrsc #ts(]72fi )7,1 612-790-7t\60 www.ahrahomcsnrn.colr
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
ss.
COI.]NTY OF CARVER )
I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on
December 21,2020, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice ofa Public
Hearing to consider a request for variances to modify a non-conforming structure by
adding a 2nd story to an existing home located at 9243 Lake Riley Boulevard. Zoned
Single-Family Residential @SF), Planning Case No. 2021-05 to the persons named on
attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner,
and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage
fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses ofsuch owners were those appearing as such
by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota" and by other appropriate
records.
Subscribed and m to before me
Kim T. Meuwissen, Deputy k
thiFJ:+ day o
4,rrYl
2020.
Notary Pub
Seal)
JEAITI
anoffneota
Subject
Parcel
Dllchimer
ThG map is neither a legally recoded map nor a suNey and i9 not inteoded to be used
as one. ihb map is a compilalion of ecotds, informalion and data located an vanou3 cjty,
couitv. staie and federaloftces and olher sources regadrng the area shown and is lo
be ufu for aebrence purpoces only The cfy does not waranl that the Geogftlphic
lnionnation Systern (GlS) Data used to p.epare $is map are eror free. and the Crty does
not lepresent that the Gls Data can b€ us€d for navigatonal, facking or any other
purpoae requidng eracting rft,asurelrEnt of d6tance or diledion or pfecjs,oo in the
d€ficton of geographic batureJ. The preceding dEdairns is p.ovlded pu6uanl to
Minnesota Stratutes 5466.03, Subd. 21 (2000). and dle user of thas map acknowledges
at the City shall not be liable for any damages, and erpressly waives all daims and
agrces to deEnd, indemnify. and hold harmless the City forn any and all claims b.olght
by User, rts employees or agents. or third padies whidl arise out of the 6e/s access or
use of data prcvided.
TAX-NAME)}
tTAX-ADD-LI r
TAX-ADD-L2tr
Next Record,r(TAX-NAiiEr
ITAX_ADD_LI r
rTAX_ADD-L2r
Subiect
Parcel
Obchll|E
Thb map is ne her a ktgally rccorded map nor a 3uruoy aM is nol anlended to be used
as one. This map is a co.npiletion of rcco.ds, informatoo and datia located in vaious cny.
count, state and fede(al ofices and olher soorae3 reg6dino the area shotn and is to
be used br refereoce puryo6es only. The City does nol warant that the Geograoic
lnbmatiofl System (GlS) Data usod lo prepare this map are eno( free, and tlE Crty does
not epresent that the Gls Data can be used for navoational, lracking or any other
pu.po6e requidne eEcling measuement of distance or dirc(ion or preciSioi in the
depictbn of gcogEphic featuies The ptecedino disdainE is provrded purguant to
Minnesota Statnes s,l66 03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user ol thas map actnorliedges
afl the City shall not be liable ,or any damages. and e&re$iy waives all claims. and
aorees lo detend, indemnrt. and hold hamless the City tom any and all daams broooht
by User, its employees or agents, o. third partjes which adse otit of the us€/s access or
use of data 9rovided.
N
rh,
il
i--,. *H
rlt 2'.'
i It
r
i
I
IEt
I
I,
I
t
Ir,4 \'/
JI
I
I
tr .
I
lt-.1
i r
i
PJ
1
t '7 -.r-. -
IY
T',+
r;l;Esis
EITEEE€
EBt qA;e
gEIfEEEE
H
c'gf E
f;$ eE;sgtr?E e F r! >
P9;Eel:3; b;bF€
uijc,
No6l
6
i(,
ooo
o
q
ot;;
c;c
o
11)
E
c).c
Eo
iu-
o
co
o-
E
o
o)
o
E(
Ui:,
o
o
vo
o
9.!
fo Eo(,
E
o
oo
E
E
oo
q.
ID
o
ll.,
o
o
oo,
oo,
n)
i
oq)
oa
o
o).c
o.
J)
o)
Eo-
o
E
0.)
o)
o
o)
o
oc
L
o
p
peog
BE5eo!
@c;
rOo6
izBoEqa
oE
ol-or<
0)-
c
rl)
9
q
P
o
E
E
o
2
F
E
c!
o9F.
c!
oN
d
a(!:,
co
j
ot,
0)
F O
E
dt
o)
o
ooF.
t-
o)
o
E(
oEo
oEfoo
o-
o,c
4.
q,
Cco(E
Ee
EottEo
eFoo8P
oo'Ep([(
E
ET
s6
ct=
9.6oP
ocot'6o
8E
LL
@(
U)
E
rl)
coN
0)
Eo
E
Ec
c)
ot
Eot!
0.,
o
oo
oi
orl)
6
o)
G
o
E
o)
poo
o-
f
0)
5
o
o)p
Ec(
5
o,
g
6
0)
ooo
c
o
oo
oc
o
o
c(
o
o
Eo
lJ
z
o,o
E
o
oac,
9a
UJz
utoEcoo,o
o,c
o,
Ec
o)
E
c
c
Eco
Eco-
cq
q
B,;
lc
o
C)
E
t
g
E
E
Ig
E
9s
a
i
e
E
E
6
c
E
s a
E
P
c
ea
s
t
E
E
B
a
E
E
3
5
tg
89
E
I
E
q
3
II
I
E
E 9
E 96E
E
6
5
o
E
Et
I
E
E
E
6 8
ts
d,
9
t
a
E
8e
c
a
6e
q .
o
E36
E
9
q
6E
I
a
R6 6z
E_
8
E
I E
E
Eag
t
E 8€E
p
q
5
e
ga
P
s
E
e
E?
P&
E
I
a
9
E
IE
I
E
E E
9
3 E e
IE!
a t3EEE
J
n
3I
e
I
E
T€
9
q
EaE
Ep 6g
3
I
g
q
b.
E
9 I
E 3
EE
6 a
6...
o9ECOo
o=OE
ooo
t!.
J
eo
iii9
o
oo
o.
Et.o
o.osto-J
I ii)
a, .=
o.:l
f'g
eO,r! .E
a;
Ei:
c,
lo
9
t!
JoJ
CDt
oo
gcro.=
oi.9.
tEIE
9oEo3CDo. .
EbEc, l!.
9E
otrza
t,(
E
tr
agEo
CDc
ooE
P5
ooo'=-
E.
JE
o9o
a5.:or
eEEo.
ze
66a!
cE(
Eso
E
C;
E
s
E
D
o
9
F
E
cioo
t-
o
NoN
rrt
co
oE
o,)
F
2dl
0,
5
oo
r-..
F
o)
o
EocO
clo(.)
oI
o
LLo
E.
o
c
IDp
ot
Eol!
o
@
r1.)
coN
o)
Eo
o)
cE.
a
q)ccotEtro
E!
E9ot,
E!
9.\
rao8E
E'-'
ooo
e;
196
d=
E6oP)
ocET'qB
8E
J
J
o)
EoI
o
E
q)
Eo
o)
o)
U>
d
o
L
o
E6
E9
BE
o55toE
O
Q -siiF
O'E
a6
oS
N-o<
o
o,)-
c
O'BEiD
H5 :9"
E
e EE oo$ g
EEEBreEEp'- 35€ E
iEE *"ig!
HEB E3E;;
XE ==E 6:
E.P 9ETX-.o.o bEi*
E;E EE Ee
iEg iEEi
EEi a#E.EFiin-c O)(!
c(JoFC.{ot
rl)
E
fo-
o([
fo
E
o
o
9
c
oE
96,
o,
2
o
d)
oo-
fo-
o)
F
oo
Eo
oo
E
Eoo
G
o-
o,
E
o
o
e t/'l lD-'6 _e rl qx-
s ;e E|EEEEE
EiEHE;aEE
E-El;;liacE=
igEIEllEEgi
6Jc.
sith
o
E
oc
c
Ec
o)
o.
c,
E(!
Eo
o
3;
o
c
c)
o,
odro
E!
EOEoEg
EE;g
9q,
EA6ooo)i= -c'a-qo
XE
oo-qE!+cr(!ol'
6o
b8(
l)E.
zt8eE6
eEo<
trEO'L6g
9fiP2d-
E
E,
E
E
t6I
3
a
iiiiiliisiiii
EiiEgEfieigii
tiiiEtEigliii
EgEEiE!EEEiEEE
4
a-Ecotx5
d9E
Ea
Pc
EE'
Et;
3! aE36
E9P
PPp
ctihE9
l!e
6lEe
EE!
efrE
e
EE'
6Eg
5i8IF:{:
iEis!i 9
358
id
Ei:
6
lllo
o
it,
ooJ oooeo
o-
Gl)
CL
CI
rD
io
ro
CIIG
E8.9
cL i!
eto-J
I ii)
6r .=+
6i=
Oa! .g
E
c6 ..
o9trtoo
o=
A.lErooo
E,
tro
o-
o
o
o
o
U9 -O) .: .J
i,EE sg E
EE-rf- aE;;
IEEE gEgE
EE?ip EiiEp
EgiEEEEfEEasEHi
gf;E
9ETE,
Ig*E+ EgE;
lq.9 .c.= oU)F()(Llo6..9 ARt.cdd)+:lg
lF o tr(J @FN(r)t
r!.
i
E
h,
E>
Ei
EE
FE
5
Esb9
E.i5E
I
ooo(L
oq
QA O OO Oe)O O OO Q n9 e e O OO Q O O A O O OO O OA O OO OO OONEr .{ @ l:r..r oo sl q)ll,t t (.oi qr \o F @(D o nt !-r N (n i @F 6 qr6 - rn < 66 o6EiQErne) < < e) e, e) e, O o A r.l O c, c) c) .r .{ !.r ..r H F{ r< .-r . : {. ..r N ri i 6 66oQOoOOAAOOoOQe)Qooooooooooooaoooooo=o5@OO .O O O O O O O O O ql O.O Or Or Or Or Or (o !n rn rrr rrt r/t r^ 6'n.n !n rn l.rr < S - -F\ ..1 r.l F\ ?r .{ i ri !.- -r r- F. l.\ l.\ l.\ F\ F. Ot Ot Or Or Ot 6 Oi or Ot ( Oi Oi .i .i .iriNcOcOF@aO@ (. cO (D (b oQ l: @ r. N t\ t\ l.\ F- F. F. - r. N F F- F. F i\ F. F. F- Ct O O6lnl/) l,) rrl l^ r/) t/) O rA !n Ln !a !/l l/) lJ) l/1 rn La Ln ra !n r, u) ul rn !ir, !n !/l ur sl ra !A !a !^ 6 utrarNC! a! N a! N N N a{ N a{ .\t N a! a! N a\l a! N a! N a! a! N r! a{ a{ a! N C.l c\i .\i r\i N aV a.t N
x*4*cc59999999999999
Ii ii iiiEiiiiiiiiiiii ddddO>>>> >>!t== == - -= = =====FFF5 > > > > > > e a d. d. a aa aa aea aa < < <*t22222=i E v Y E E e u e e E E e EE;;;;;;H3333=333i==i=999rrUl <tr m i\ d rn r.t t\ O) Ft !^ F- ..,t t t Or Ft !n F Ot r{ !-t !-{r:i (n ur l^(O \O F. @ r.r r",r -{.!.! N rn (r (ntl $ tl - u1 @F.g n n ! n ir .i .{ .\t 6t N r! r\t N l\t a! N .\l.\ N a! N N.!an ol o ( or o ot or o or o o or or (h (h or ot or <tr (h qr or or
zd
9<lan$<l 9rlrl<t{ ro Nf!N Nr\ro sl <t stt <tstst\lot<tv1rnQ()l!|AQooooQ lY, m.n,yr .n.n.{ !^ !6 6'n|i|n66rnur-r .-r(9(o(o\o@io{o@@(9 (o r^ !a Lo urr^(r, (g \g O6666(ri(!itriioi6i66r-6o@6e@@ or @@a co.o r. -@ @-@co-66@@ 6,: .: t: ,r. ,\ r: + i r: F F. r: r.. r., r.. n * r.. r'. * d r- d d n n .I .I * A r'. I I I I - IFrH .< !-'r .i r-r !-r r-.t !-.t r-l t< r-l .i ri ..1 r{ r-.t !-{ ..1 .i d .-{ i i r-r .r .r i ;-,rlrl (n ai dl (n m an rn rn at lll lll llr l1l .(| l1t (r1 an an rn (n (n m ln an .n (n.n att (n (n .n (n an an tn .vil,l lJl ra !,r ra ra La !n rrt rrt qr qr qr qt ',
l
Ln L/t rri ut rrt !n L,t ut rn lrl rn Ln rrl !,1 (,) '
rt
rn rri irt iri iriirir/l Ln r.'! L/t (^ !,t !/t !n !n ul ul u) ra (^ ut rn lJ) ljl rn r/t Ln L,1 v) r/l rn Lai !n lri '/r ut lai rri ...i lri '/
i lrirrizzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
dz zz z z z z z z z zz z zz zz zz z zzz zz z z zz z z z Z iii i
6 6 6 ei \rl v) u.t t^ t\ t^ th ti tll vl \h th th \h .h vl 6 a t^ th .h ql .t1 .rt.h tt.\' tr) vl q) q u\ v'! u! ul v1 t4t!a ttt^ v1 vl t.t ttt ui 6 d v1 t^ t.t t_.t a aAt 6i da ini i ai i;;
rrr-rrrrr-r-r-r---rr-rr-r--rrrrr---i.atz z z z z z z z z z z z z 2 2 - - = - - = - = Z = = = Z 2 Z = 2 2 - - = z
rrrrrrrrr-rr--rrr-rr-r-rrr-i-.iiiiFuuL, u 9 u u (',) (J u u u u u (J (') (J (J (J u L, (J (J O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
d,
o
2n nn eee*ooooooo6ooo66HJJH = o o o o o o:: = = l:::: = I z::v t G. \J c. d. d. d.d c i t tr r r @ cl (D d, .o dt dl 6) @ ao dt d, d! @ @}EI= IEEEEII II ==????=E;;;iiiiaiii,-iendj;8 8;8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 s I I I I I E = = i].iii]-ii d dre'EEEXE PEeEEE ".*2riiti2iuuEsuEsE99---;BB6(Jurr!OBrurr! r!uJ=f tl=llta - !! e-u r eJ !s !! ,= ee ,= = y-r er < ,, v\t^t^,^ -.3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3I < I I I-l v) (J o (, tl aJ IJ tl IJ u (J LJ (J .j t{ vl (r\ ar1 N.a !,l d F or < rn F...r l,l o} -r ,.l1 N or H -adx !/i o !-{ Fr o r.,l Fr o o tiO d c) F\ rr} '
rt
rrr 6 ro F. - ,-{ -r :t ..1 l..i i\ ro 6ri ii s{tt,r,or.,< or O O O N .! (n $ \o (o (a cp O .{ r< d H - - i ri ..r N c.t ^
i ^i..i i\i i\i i.i d tir r"{ c.r c! N r.,rFN.n (n (n (r1 (n rn .n ot an lY' ln € oo or ( q| 0r ot o) <tr ot <h o1 ot ot or <h (h o,t or ot .h oll oi oi ari
I
f,
fr-6rao nE *59 g 3 Ea3Y "E=; z-zZgF EE_E Z E
EEEI,EEi=;EEIg3EgEIiEEEEEiEIEiE:E:E
lJJl\J d, e, lJeG6E C,EC d,>
Ft-sFFFFFFFF
2Tt-iFFFFFFFF-*
oo=ooooooooT00zoooooooo
4r!=-.. !!dE=ceeGc,d,d,daJL' trJ r! (J r! r!
UJQ;EB;EB33E66B!
u !,t o .{ F{ c, F{ F{ o o -{ o ..
oioooAra!antl(o{o6@ul6ranananananan dt rn (n rt an
o
o
@o
o'
z0
or
o
o
2
@
o