76-13 Variance Lot 15 and 16 Block 3 Chanhassen Estates Scanned Planning Fileler° s ^
22 M�.1 s c ;fS
N
u h
-f"S I
y
Lt1776-1976
n
CITY OF 'P^
CHANHASSH
7610 LAREDO DRIVEOP.O. BOX 1470CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317*(612) 474-8885
\jOLUTION p
STAFF MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 3, 1976
TO: Don Ashworth, City Administrator
FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
SUBJECT: Waiver of Plat for Lots 15 and 16, Block 3
Chanhassen Estates
PETITIONER: Craig Shulstad
8031 Cheyenne Avenue
Chanhassen, Minn.
Attached hereto please find a waiver of plat request from Mr.
Craig Shulstad to adjust a lot line between Lots 15 and 16,
Block 3, Chanhassen Estates. The purpose of the lot adjustment
is to allow Mr. Shulstad to acquire sufficient property from
Lot 16 to retain a fence constructed on his neighbor's property.
Pursuant to Resolution #76-55, I feel it is appropriate to
administratively issue a waiver of plat for the above described
property for the following reasons:
1. The properties under consideration (Lots 15 and 16, Block
3, Chanhassen Estates) are duly recorded as legal lots
of record as conveyed in the plat of Chanhassen Estates.
2. The waiver will not create a substandard parcel as
outlined in Ordinance 47, Section 7.05.
3. The waiver will not create a new building lot as defined
in Section 7.05, sub. 5 of City Ordinance 47.
th
P5
8031 Cheyenne Avenue
Chanhassen, Mn. 55317
August 10, 1976
Mr. James W. Brehl
Mann, Hazel, Green, Hayes Simon & Aretz
332 Hamm Building
St. Paul, Mn. 55102
Re: George Thomas Property
Dear Mr. Brehl:
My wife and I have received confirmation from Egan, Field and
Novak surveyors that the cedar fence which I constructed in 1972
between Lots 15 and 16, Block 3, Chanhassen Estates, encroaches upon
the property now owned by Mr. and Mrs. George Thomas. We are indeed
sorry for this circumstance, as I have indicated to both the Thomases
and to you, because prior to constructing the fence I solicited the
concurrence of Mr. Ed Kraftenberg, the owner of the Thomas's property
at the time, and together we located the fence on what we both believed
to be the lot line.
In an earlier conversation, Mr. Thomas indicated that he hoped we
would be able to resolve the matter without removing the fence. I agree
with that point of view as I believe that the fence is beneficial to
both the Thomases and to us. Consisting of cedar posts and cross -
boards with heavy netting, the fence is substantial and attractive.
It has effectively reduced the flow of pedestrian traffic, chiefly
that of small children, which existed across both our yard and the
Thomas,'.s. (In winter, snowmobiles had also crossed the back yards of
both properties.) And, of course, the fence confines our small dogs
from trespassing on the Thomas's and other neighbors' properties.
Because part of the fence was mistakenly constructed on the
Thomas's property, however, we would like to make amands. To that
end we offer to purchase what we estimate to be approximately 463.5
square feet from the Thomases, as shown in red on the attached
illustration, representing that part of the Thomas property contained
within the fence plus sufficient square feet between the fence and the
street to align the fence with the lot line. For this amount we are
willing to pay the Thomases the sum of one hundred dollars($100.00).
As an alternative, should the Thomases prefer to maintain a
straight lot line between our respective properties, we would be
willing to purchase the area described above plus the square feet
outlined in blue on the attached illustration for the sum of two
hundred dollars($200.00).
-2-
We are told by the City of Chanhassen that either resolution of
the matter could be implemented without difficulty. No setback
requirements would be violated and no public hearings or other
inconveniences would be necessary.
With regard to the buckthorn plantings which are on the Thomas's
property, we would nave no objection should the Thomases wish to make
additional plantings to clarify the location of the lot line.
Please discuss the alternative offers with the Thomases, and
feel free to call either my wife at her office (725,-3540) or me
at mine (540-3745).
Thank you for your interest and understanding in settling this
matter.
Sincerely,
R. C. Sh stad
Attachment
cc: Mr. & Mrs. George Thomas
-Don Ashworth, City Administrator
0
co
c
:3
:5
C,
—
0
G
ul
:L
CF
>
co
c
m-
T
0
>
[Ti
Z
0
(D
(D
(D
G)
Su
I
tj
4 �,
U�l
m
Ll
a
Ln
0
z
tf)
Z
m
M
Z—
Z
>
<
M
Pl
Z
r:
rl
i >
01C:
In
0
<
<
m
Ul
W
-N
-i
-<
0
In
Cf)
n