The URL can be used to link to this page

04-26-16 BZA Agenda Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Tuesday, April 26, 2016 7 pm 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chambers I. Approval of Minutes— March 22, 2016, Regular Meeting II. The Petition(s) are: 4127 Beverly Avenue Paul and Anna Lakin, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11 (A)(3)(c) Side Yard Setback Requirements • 1.9 ft. off of the required 8 ft. to a distance of 6.1 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new solarium/porch addition. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(5) Building Envelope Requirements • 1 ft. outside of the building envelope, which is restricted to 15 ft. in height, for an addition that is 16 ft. in height. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new solarium/porch addition. , III. Other Business IV. Adjournment ; This docun�ent is available in alternate formats upaii a 72-hour request. Please call 7b3-593-8006(TTY: 763-593-�968)ta r�n�ke a request. Examples ofi�Iternate formats ' may include larc�e print,�lectronic, Braille,a��cJiocass�tte,etc. Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 22, 2016 A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, March 22, 2016, at City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chair Perich called the meeting to order at 7 pm. ��p . -.. Those present were Members Maxwell (arrived at 7:10), Nelson, Orens#ein, Peri�fi and Planning Commission Representative Baker. Also present were Associate �lanner��rant Writer Emily Goellner, and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. s �� #� I. Approval of Minutes— October 27, 2015 Regular Meeti�g MOVED by Nelson, seconded by Perich and motion carri�d unanimously to approve the October 27, 2015, minutes as submitted. Baker abstained II. The Petition(s) are: 1319 Tyrol Trail Dan & Sheila Brouqhton, AppIiC�11fiS Request: Waiver from Section 1'1.21; �ingle Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setback Requirer'r�ients • 3 ft. off of the re�uired �5 ft. to a distance of 12 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (south) prop�rty line. Purpose: To ailow#or the �onstruction of a new house. Request: �llfaiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)�3)(a) Sid� Yard Setback Requirements • 3 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 12 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new house. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements • 5 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 30 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (northwest) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new house. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 22, 2016 Page 2 Goellner explained the applicants' request to tear down the existing house and rebuild a new one. The proposed new house would be located 30 ft. from the front yard property line, rather than the required 35 ft. and 12 ft. from both side yard property lines, rather than the required 15 ft. She reminded the Board that this property previously received variances for various proposals, however the variances being requested now are smaller than the ones previously granted. She noted that the applicants have stated that their unique circumstances include: a challenging topography that limits the buildable area, the fact that it is a comer, triangular- shaped lot which also limits the buildable area, and that similar variances have been granted in the past for proposed additions. She added that staff is r�commending approval of the requested variances. ��: Baker asked if any of the previously granted variances were acted upcin. Goel�ner said no, none of the previously proposed additions were built < < Baker asked if the recently approved ordinance chan��,rregarding the height of a structure affected these applicants. Goellner stat��1 that fh4�� project is limited by the new requirements. Jennifer Christiaansen, U+B Architects, representing �h��pplicant, said she's been working with the property owners for about a year. At first they were interested in remodeling the existing home but due to the costs and location of the existing home it wasn't suitable and was too much of an investment to make the house livable. She referred to the proposed new house and said they have been careful with the design so it will not affect the essential �ha�ra�ter of'the neighborhood, and will hopefully not cause any tree removal. She referred to�he practical difficulties with this property and stated that they feel their proposal is reasor��le, they are respecting what's there now, and will be blending in with the housing s��k of the existing neighborhood. She added that the shape of this lot is difficult and that the`ne.ed for variances is not caused by the landowner. Nelson stated that she is understanding of the topography and unique shape of this lot and is pleased that tt�e current variance requests are smaller than what has been granted for this property in th�'�ast.''She added the request is reasonable and is in harmony with the purpose and.intent of'the City's ordinances. Baker,asked if the current owners added a new bay window. Christiaansen stated that the previous owners installed a bay window. Baker asked if the new house will have a two-stall garage. Christiaansen said yes and showed on the site plan how they will pull the house forward and change the grade a little bit in order to make the garage work with the new house and the existing curb cut. Maxwell asked why a front yard variance is needed. Christiaansen said they are working around the trees and the shape of the lot. Baker noted that the existing ash tree on the property will be gone a couple of years because of Emerald Ash Borer. Christiaansen stated that their goal is to build the house within the buildable area and to save as many Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 22, 2016 Page 3 trees as possible. Maxwell stated that trying to preserve trees does constitute a unique feature with the property. Perich opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing no one wishing to comment, Perich closed the public hearing. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Perich and motion carried unanimously to approve the following variance requests to allow for the construction of a new house: • 3 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 12 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (south) property line. • 3 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 12 ft. at its closest p.o�n��o the side yard (east) property line. • 5 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 30 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (northwest) property line. >:: 221 Sunnyridge Lane Sallv Jacquemin, Applicant Request: Waiver from Sec�«n��1�1.21; Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setb�ck R�uirements � �, • 7.7 ft. off of the required 15�t. to a distance of 7.3 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (north) praperty line. Purpose: To �!lc�w for the construction of a new deck. Goellner referred to a dcawing of fihe property and noted that this lot was created through a subdivision done in 20""14. She explained that at the time of the subdivision there was a deck located in the sa'me area as the proposed new deck, however the City required that the deck be rernoved in order to proceed with the subdivision of the property so that the property wtiUld be in conformance with all of the setback requirements. The applicant is no�u;asking for a variance to build a new deck 7.3 ft. away from the side yard property line rather than the required 15 ft. Goellner noted the applicant's stated unique circumstances in this ca�e ha�re to do with the recently re-drawn property line, the small size of the back yard, the small size of a deck without a variance, and the existing retaining walls and stairs in the back yard. Goellner stated that given that the lot was recently split and the former deck in the same location was required to be removed, and also given the size of the variance request, staff is recommending denial of the requested variance. She added that there are other options within the buildable area in which to build a deck that would not compromise the essential character of the neighborhood. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 22, 2016 Page 4 Nelson asked about the dimensions of the proposed new deck. Goellner said the width of the proposed deck varies from approximately 12 ft. to 17 ft. and the length is 32 ft. making the deck approximately 450 square feet in size. Maxwell asked what steps were taken when the lot was subdivided to put future landowners on notice regarding the size and location of a deck. Goellner said there were no conditions placed on the subdivision regarding future construction, but the City does expect property owners to be aware of limitations and setback requirement�� Maxwell asked if approval of the subdivision was subject to the removal of the pre�'icius d�ck. Goellner said yes, and added that the City can't tell all new homeowners �bout timrtations regarding the property they are buying. Nelson agreed and added that as � real esta�e agent she always tells buyers to consider setback requirements when they are�thi�xl��ng about additions and decks. �� Sally Jacquemin, Applicant, said she bought this house in Octo[�er and she is very excited to be a part of this community. She said she realizes staff i� r,ecoi�tmending denial of her request, but she truly feels that her proposal meets:the state st�t�af� regarding practical difficulties. First, the property will be used in a reasonable manner The proposed deck will be enclosed by trees and will not be visible from the street. Second, the shape of the lot is unique given the subdivision that occurred an� the#opography of the property. She stated that she is designing the deck to mimic th� para��el aspect of#he property line and to be the least intrusive as possible. Third, the problems,uvith the property were not caused by her, the current landowner. She said fr�m her=perspecti�e it doesn't matter, and should not impact the Board's decision whether she is a new homeowner or if she has owned the home for 20 years. Fourth, her proposal is'not aitering the essential character of the locality. She said Golden Val��y' is al� about enjoying nature and her proposal supports the nature of the community, pt'eserves the character of the City, and the neighboring property owner supports her proposa�� Sh�"said she realizes her variance request is large, but only one corner of the deck needs �::variance, the other corner meets the setback requirement. ��. Maxwell asked the applicant if she`�onsidered other options to build a compliant deck. Jacquemin said yes,. She showed the Board a drawing of a compliant deck and stated that it resulted in only 10Q square feet of usable space and would be very limited for use as a deck. Maxwell noted that a conforming deck could be built further to the east. Jacquemin stated that ther�:are cor�crete stairs and retaining walls that would have to be removed if she;built a deck further east. Maxwell noted that a deck could be built over the stairs and retaining walls.,Jacquemin stated that would block light to the downstairs windows. She showed the Board photos from the street view and stated that she wants to do more landscaping,.w�iich would help screen the deck as well. Nelson asked Jacquemin if she purchased this home from the neighboring property owner. Jacquemin said yes and added that there are a lot of questions she didn't think to ask. She stated that she was raised in Michigan and they don't have rules like this there. Maxwell stated that the variance request is large and asked Jacquemin if she would consider a lesser amount than what she has requested. Jacquemin said what she is Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 22, 2016 Page 5 currently proposing would be ideal, but she would be willing to consider a lesser variance. She suggested a 5-foot variance with the promise to plant additional trees. Perich opened the public hearing. David Knaeble, 227 Sunnyridge Lane, said he is in support of the requested variance. He said it won't be very impactful like a house or garage addition could be. He said he won't be able to see the proposed deck from his house and that this is a very minor request that should be supported. Baker asked Knaeble, in the interest of full disclosure, if he subdivided and sold the property to the applicant. Knaeble said yes. �� Peter Knaeble, 6001 Glenwood Avenue, stated that the Board ap�roved the previous proposal on the agenda and that was to tear down a house and Eiuild a rtew one:with three variances and that this proposal is just for an at-grade deck. He said it seems : disingenuous to say that this proposal is altering the essential charac�er of tf�e neighborhood. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Perieh closed the public hearing. Nelson stated that there were many reasons.��! grant the pre�ious variance requests. That property was a corner lot with a small builc�able ��ea and,a lof'of topography issues. Orenstein stated that there are other options irr fhis ca�e. One is to build the deck further to the east. He said he would be interested in s�eing how a deck constructed where the stairs and retaining walls are currently located wauld interfere with the amount of light in the basement. Baker stated that this was a-<very ��intentious subdivision and was not an easy decision for the Planning Commission to rt`t'��e. He said it is interesting that the seller is the only , person in attendance supporting��his variance request, yet he didn't disclose the constraints to the buyer. He:said he"disagrees that the primary driver in this case is the essential charact�r. He thinks it is primarily the fault of the homeowner. Orenstein qu�stio��d if'there was a legal obligation for the seller to disclose the information about the former deck to the buyer. Nelson said probably not. Maxwell stated that`maybe a covenant regarding the deck should have been added at the time of sale. He said the applicant bought the house and didn't know she couldn't build a bigger deck so`fie finds it hard to blame her and the City shouldn't hold her responsible for prior circumstances. Baker said he thinks the desire to reverse a condition of a subdivision as soon as a house is sold is a different issue. Maxwell said there is no connection between the buyer and seller. He said his bigger concern is the size of the requested variance. Baker questioned if granting this variance is fair to future landowners. Orenstein suggested tabling the request and allowing the applicant to come back with alternate design plans that might require a smaller variance. Perich noted that he is not convinced a variance would be granted even if it is smaller. Maxwell agreed that he Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals March 22, 2016 Page 6 doesn't think a 7.7 ft. variance request would be approved. Jacquemin said she would be happy to come back with alternate design plans. Nelson reiterated that there are other buildable areas on this property and stated that the Board really tries to be consistent with the variances they grant. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Orenstein and motion carried 4 to 1 to table this request to the April 26, 2016, Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. Baker voted no. II1. Other Business No other business was discussed. ,.;., IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:56 pm. ��.,,, �„ F��., :;:.�:., David Perich, Chair Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant �;�; �� ',°��,�� . „�;,� , 1 x,, � , ,�'�� , T�'h��ica� T�evela►p�.ent Department ��-.��-so�s r��-��-��os t��) Date: April 26, 2016 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer Subject: 4127 Beverly Avenue Paul and Anna Lakin, Applicants Paul and Anna Lakin, owners of the property at 4127 Beverly Avenue, are seeking two variances from the City Code to build a solarium on an existing patio. The applicant is seeking a variance of 1.9 feet off the required side yard setback of 8 feet to a distance of 6.1 feet at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line. The maximum height for an addition in this location is 15 feet. The building envelope is restricted to 15 feet in height at the 8-foot setback line on the eastern side of the property. The applicant is requesting a variance of 1 foot outside of the building envelope for an addition that is 16 feet in height. The height is measured from the top of the flat roof of the solarium to the ground. The patio's retaining wall is included in the height measurement. The property currently has a patio with a retaining wall that is approximately 4 feet tall and 275 square feet in size. The proposed 1-story glass solarium would be built on top of the existing patio and would be approximately 175 square feet. If a variance from the side yard setback requirement is granted, the distance between the home at 4127 Beverly Avenue and the neighboring home to the east, 4121 Beverly Avenue, would be 10.2 feet at the closest point. The neighboring home is located 4.1 feet from the property line. The applicant notes that the property is unique in that the home was built on a relatively small lot that is 40 feet in width, so there is limited space for additions. The applicant also notes that the solarium will be glass, so it will have less of a visual impact than a regular building addition. Lastly, the applicant notes that the solarium would be built on top of an existing patio and retaining wall. This home was built in 2007 after the previous home was demolished. Prior to construction, the previous owner requested variances for the new home. The owner was granted a variance for the rear yard setback, but was denied variances for side yard setback and lot coverage. The Board denied a variance request to locate the retaining wall and steps within 4 feet of the east property line. When the home received a building permit, City staff allowed the retaining wall, patio, and steps to be located 6.1 feet from the eastern property line because it was considered a landing for the stairs up to the home's entrance. Stairs, landings, patios, and retaining walls are permitted within the side yard setback area. The proposal requires variances from the following sections of City Code: Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(3) Side Yard Setback Requirements: The minimum side yard (east) setback requirement is 8 feet. The applicant is requesting a variance of 1.9 feet off of the required 8 feet to a distance of 6.1 feet at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line. Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(5) Building Envelope Requirements: The building envelope is restricted to 15 feet in height at the 8-foot setback line on the eastern side of the property. The applicant is requesting a variance of 1 foot outside of the building envelope, which is restricted to 15 feet in height, for an addition that is 16 feet in height. Staff Recommendation: In reviewing this application, staff has maintained the points of examination to the considerations outlined in Minnesota State Statute 462.357, requiring that a property exhibit "practical difficulties" in order for a variance to be granted.To constitute practical difficulties, the property owner must propose to use the property in a reasonable manner,the landowners' problem must be due to circumstances unique to the property not caused by the landowner, and that the variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality. Staff does not recognize any practical difficulty that constitutes the approval of the applicants' variance requests. Many surrounding properties in this neighborhood are larger than this property and have larger minimum setback requirements. Building an addition, even a glass solarium, in this location would alter the essential character of the locality. Staff recommends denial of the request for a side yard variance of 1.9 feet off of the required 8 feet to a distance of 6.1 feet at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line. Staff recommends denial of the request for a variance of 1 foot outside of the building envelope, which is restricted to 15 feet in height, for an addition that is 16 feet in height. -�� Subject Property: `"`�' ` `':' 4127 Beverlv Ave .�,� a � �2z, 4275'� 4205 � 4113 4127 4121 4117 h � ��6 32�� Z 4 4��2 4200 �;i�-v�.�:. . F': ��,u (�i A f .�;.�..v.,. , �`7 4+�'�,F�a?_. a Planning j %'800 Goiclen Valley Roacl.Golden Valley,MN 55427-45fi8 c.ttt�c.�� ` 763-593 rs04J5 { TTY:703-593-3968 j �v�vw.goidenvalleymn.gov � �lanningc��goldenvaileymn.yov ��,��?�� .� � r� � � � ,� � � L � ��-r � � � ��Il�y . . . . - . . - Street address of property in this application: . �-// 2`7 ��U�t l U f�V�.n(,c� , . . . . . Name(individual, or corporate entitiy): �' I `�� .r-� �,�t"✓1 Address: �'1�-� ��;v�r �rv� nu,�. ' f�..�. I/�-(�� r�r✓, S�� Phone Number: Email Address: C�/� �v � `��`� l /r��L /�`�. `✓t � e�ec-T� �v r�� Authorized Representative(if other than applicant): Name: �'�1�..✓-f'y�,� ,�-/��.- Address �d i I'3c�,•d�ii s'�,t� lz'r�'r�G� t.� � • . r �'✓ S.�` ��Lf . � Phone Number: Email Address: �1�. `��I4 �l(f �ir�� " � - �� Property Owner(if other than applicant): Name: Address: Phone Number: Email Address: � � . • Provide a detailed description of the variance(s)being requested: The variance requested at 4127 Beverly Avenue will ailow the residents to construct a small enclosed, one-story porch or solarium on the east side of their existing house. The variance asks for an additional 1.9', so that the addition can be built on top of an existing retaining wall and deck. The new construction will be built no further east than the existing retaining wall. Provide a detailed description of need for a variance from the Zoning Code,including description of building(s),description of proposed addition(s),and description of proposed alteration(s)to property: The existing building on the site is a single-family, two-story house. The proposed addition to the house will be constructed 36' back (south) from the front of the house and will extend 17' along the existing retaining wall. There is already a�4'retaining wall with deck between the house and the neighbor's house on which the addition will be constructed. This addition will not alter the footprint of the existing house, which will minimize the impact on the neighbor to the� east. The east neighbor is probably the only one who could be affected by this addition. The addition will be heated space and will be mostly glass, so will look transparent and, thereby, less massive for the neighbor. . . � � , � � �?800 Golden Vailey Road,Golden Valley,MN 554Z7-�F588 ci�y r.r�� 3095 � TTY:7o3-593-3968 � www.goidenvalleymn.gov � nlanning�yolclenvalleymn.gov �}��?�� va��e�r � � • • . . . - . Minnesota State Statue 462.357 requires that a property exhibit"practical difficulties"in order for a variance to be considered.Practical difFiculties: • result in a use that is reasonable � are based on a problem that is unique to the property • are not caused by the landowner �--� • do not alter the essential character of the locality To demonstrate how your request will comply with Minnesota State Statute 462.357,please respond to the following questions. Exp�ain the need for your variance request and how it will result in a reasonable use of the property. This variance is requested so the owners may enjoy a discrete space that connects to the outdoors and that is separate from the open floor plan of kitchen, dining and living space comprising their existing first floor. This will give needed privacy, create light-filled area and give them a little more space. What is unique about your property and how do you feel that it necessitates a variance? This is a narrow lot (40'x 110') and the house was efficiently built to maximize the design envelope without infringing on neighboring lots. The attached garage takes up a large portion of the lot and does not leave much space�for rooms that connect to the outdoors, like a porch or solarium. At 22'wide, the house is not overly spacious. This additional solarium will provide some `breathing room'in these tight quarters. Explain how the need for a variance is based on circumstances that are not a result of a landowner action. Neither the narrow lot nor the configuration of the existing house are the result of these landowners'actions. They purchased the house, and now would like to use what is already there (the retaining wall and deck) to create a little more space that is not part of the original open plan. Explain how,if granted,the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of your neighborhood and Golden Valley as a whole. If granted, the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the well-built, architecturally interesting and respectful houses along Beverly and beyond in the North Tyrol neighborhood. The addition is set back 36'from the front of the house (and 71'from the street) and will most likely not be seen much from the street. Since the addition would be built on top of an existing retaining wall, there will not be an additional protrusion into the space between the houses. The transparent nature of a solarium will de-materialize this addition further. This addition would, in fact, create more interesting articulation along the relatively flat east expanse of elevation, as it stands now. , . � � . � � 7ti00 Golden Valley Roacl,Golden Valley,MN 55427-4588 G tty oj � 3d95 j TTY:763-5)3-3968 � w�v�v.yoldenvalleymn.gov ( planning@yoldenvalleymn.gov �y�� - v�11�� • • � • - . . . - . The City requests that you consider all available project options permitted by the Zoning Code before requesting a variance.The Board of Zoning Appeals will discuss alternative options to seeking variance with you at the public hearing.Please describe alternate ways to do your project that do not require variances from the Zoning Code. An alternative location for this addition if the variance is not granted, would be to build a solarium on the front of the house. This may also require a variance and affect more neighbors along Beverly Avenue. Secondly, if we simply built an addition on the east side to the line defined by the codes (no variance), the new solarium would be very small and construction costs would be similar with a 42% reduction in square footage, which is neither viable nor prudent for the owners. e � o 0 Current survey of your property, including proposed addition and new proposed building and structure setbacks(a copy of Golden �Valley's survey requi�ements is available upon request;application considered incomplete without a current property survey) One c�uf�ent color photograph of the area affected 6y the proposed variance(attach a printed photograph to this application or / email a digital image to planning�o.goldenvalleymn.gov;submit additional photographs as needed) ��_�,��L�, l�/�//G Cd Fee:$20o application fee for Single-Family Residential,$30o application fee for all other Zoning Districts " �Legal Description:Exact legal description of the land involved in this application(attach a separate sheet if necessary): ,,t � ��' �i�`� /r�) To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this application are true and correct. I also understand that unless construction of the action applicable to this variance request,if granted, is not taken within one year,the variance expires, I have considered all options afforded to me through the City's Zoning Code and feel there is no alternate way to achieve my objective except to seek a variance to zoning rules and regulations. I give permission for Golden Valley stafF,as well as members of the Board of Zoning Appeals,to enter my property before the public hearing to inspect the area affected by this request. Please include printed name,signature,and date for ap- plicant,authorized representative(if other than applicant),or property ower(if other than applicant). Name of applicant(please print): � GL- �//� Signature of applicant: � ' Date:��T/� Authorized Representative{if other than applicant) Name(please print): 5ignature: Date: Property Owner(if other than applicantj Name(please print): Signature: Date: P(ease note:The City of Golden Valley will send notice of your variance request to al(adjoining property owners as we(l as owners of properties directly across streets or alleys. Your neighbors have the right to address the Board of Zoning Appeafs at your public hearing. You are advised to persona(Iy contact your neighbors and explain your project to them before the public hearing. �� This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72-hour request.Please call 763-593-8006(T1Y:763-593-3968)to = 5 make a request. Examples of alternate formats may include large print,electronic,Braille,audiocassette,etc, �� r- r . • ,..� , � . , , � ., f ...�... . . .., i . . . ' `4� S•. �,�, r� i.. , t,� . . 4 i � � ` .._ �Y . � ,�., '�� _.. . , . ,� �`'C Cf � � - . .-_.'„�`,. i .s�� ?`��rt �"` .. .y �..�-- � . . � �l'�a� .. =� i" - °� ' "_ ` " � �� .. '� � rx�* ! 'i f wkMtV�s�`Y��`�#i�kRw�B�'� w.+..,.� . �;pCE .... } ,i � .. . �A�°i�" Illel rf 1 r.'+t ,�."!TF n.w..-,„ r '' v � �.'f ' � �� Y � � Y�' "3` �.'y 'w^" 4t r� �f�� . �� _.,,.y y r_.� *.:� ^ Ai'� ,. R ._ � _« _�.,. �r�4��Y _ , �f . �, �- �>.: �i ..a.:;., � _. . , ' , m,,, ' -,..» + : - �....:._=�. �. � �"'"f `w�,-,��'�f'e.rt'-...�,...:,�.. ,; r`r:. [ y� , �� ,�-�'� �c '� 'c �di `tr�`, '�t- °�", *;�} , �'�,�,� �, y� : .. _� �• .,� k:. yT I #., I1 .:Y�- �L.vYS..�.'S,�i''�. �.. � �y� �. I % k��,, ,,,�.,. , � � �'` I��`� ' � � w:.� o��,�y p'p �,r,�� - � ,� � Mii �oir. � .��s��-�,, Y.rl i � . .�.�. �� . .. ... ,.... ..�: ... �mk ulli .. � T��t��"~ ,+ , � ��.. .��a� �c' �� r p;"� �� , . .. , r,.. •.�. . , x � r ,. „, �.�, � " �,� *� , . � � � � y�. � r�� .r= � a�-^��„� ,� "� .,� w'` �� , ti� ��, s"A� v...,yy�, k,� .�k. .* `R+.�'i"L.�..�?fJ�, ' R .r.��. 4.r�' . Yw � '. �.,,i N,� � +M��i.a 1�" � +�' � • ` q�, � -y,•� j� 1.�t. ,�*a .� �� .»� �, �� ,,� >..�:: ��..�� .. , �� . ,�. � ,� � ..�. � .� ,,�.'� ,, * ; . � _ '�� , ,,� �``�"'�� w� �`,�„�,.,��,,��, �, .�;'£ ��rn . w.;�m° 1"�'..?�`� '`�'+� � • ,� , ��a, . r. h �, � � y > �, �p a _ „'� . � M; , . .^ , � . x �r�j. .` � r..��'¢�y�.�'' ��',�'�-,°1� •,«�� t.r �c�" � -'lt'� .�y�� „r',�' q� ��p��y �'.� �g� w �,��c ��°i�. .»<+Y� �` F S � : '^f.i,: . . . . _.w J:I T�' � "�'�� 'y"< fi �&�.'�. roy ��i� ' .Y. � e �" ..E' � .A w�;;�at! ��+�'""c. _ " �'�c A��" .�� . . . .� �H} , r 4,• ;�'��'�' r'f:'�� {;w;�,.'�`'�'�"'►.�;.v a',"� �,-- �,*„ : ��";� �, '�'v�,4 a'•' :.. ` �; �-r� s . • �� , � � �'� ' �.`�Sr �mi; � e f�; �" ''� . +z r ,nr. °�. t k`�� '•r�" �';"�^z''s�",:� � �,�r ;� x g,�, . ;�, � � x f ��-.. �; �. .s y a�� r�..�.��"� ��, ,��,� a yt� �';�� ,�; +�. , . r• ; . �;-s�", ,R,� �� . � ,;: � p ,,K �, �"� ,'l' „ r•. w'� �+' , ,•��^ `�" y. �"'�'' '*`��'•' y ��.k.'`�;�" �„'4�.,ti�t yd-,e a*brr�� '��,,,.---+.w: . , . y ' �.- , �- �� _ r � '.�. . �. {�, .a� ,�y4 .�.a...��£+r5•i �,�'"* .,,._ . .: , . . ' 4� ;�:�w �'�c.; 'I��t '`y,P�"yr _. ��,�g�. i - � '�+ 7F_.a ��°��'�F" �N�r '�tm'�. . ,�.,'- • ^. a , M1^ � � .. .�. -; . . .• ' .. . ., . , s _ "'� . 'S !!�a r�, , . .,. __— � . , � s� '"� �,,.� . r. , . �=� . y,� � . + � ' ' � pv �., � _ ; " . �4:��'�`4R° ��"r� -n ��t.i.a .:1 C `� T� s. �..�+t�' ,, ,A,`�.�`�"4��. ,�� 4 .R�� 1'..��+�x�:7^�� ;. "�q'�� "x �M'�h°§ry,',r, , e. a �,- �'��' , `�.�� 4 . �.�..� . �" .�. F,.w t��`�" �� ; 7tx . . - y • {,�.„ . �, w. tr i*" • � ^"� h . '. �� .w"!'e�� p Y . ` � 1; �` �l V �t er• y » ', ty �,, i .r �"", -�:;. . . ' � .. ...a.. .___ .„. . � a.`� �a�"� "ti��e� 4, A .�� ,, . .!7i:�,. ��.� � r. ,.,.' . , . .,.t•e ._. . - � ;: ...... .., � «c�.�.&+ -r .�xr . . � '; « ,. r. . .t 3" 7 ' 'r p >�.. t � � �`. �� .. b� , x - :: } �,� �x*. "k".t'� �d�r L�.*�t . � < t . �� ' `�.. .�x '��'rxx i � � . ;•r - '"�; -" . � . � . y� � . ,..}s , e . � .. . �" .�� . . „, ,�. . ,'#: � -: #<L ... +i�R�e�" �,� . .. . �'./ry,.,�•S• ' ..1\, (] � "�` .ti.q'+5C'�� -�,+ �G�" ! " M . .� ' �7'�!;' .. r.. : P � g a+k..e " .�=yat,.w".�e =!HiSwM•'.,;�, � ;�P k � �.t'k^a+$':. -#.�, �^,�� k ,�� '�.�� a, � ;:M :+� �f:�.+M'�� sr�rv� a .�` $°�n�i,r �!� .�'}ie" � '�.. �'�� . : �� , �-� . % �� : ��y:_ � ��.: � �� >'Y2 't' . � ,�. � " ��?� ��.r;yiK�� ..�t�� ,.. i ' ,. � 1 .,;" �, , .. �'; �''�' r , ,� �� . ` - _, �.�i.�"-�-. r. � �''�,f �;`� �, �� '',+�e..c..� f �� } �r, �, �� . . ;, . _ � .— � � � �i � '��ti� '�.�.,,.,,�.�.�-g''� _ � F��"" �. ��/%:' r4;i. � �, �M( . � . , �`�- .�, 1 �!� }� �F i .� ii tl i �. � t I � ��rti ;�?�,`�'. r"'. � � � .F ;� . , '�' :Y:d;.. i�� ;f`. � �� ¢��a " . yr � :.� �`� �� i, `,'t a,`. �`.�`��, • �..- , . _ 'i `. s�-.-: '+ti,j:�i- ::x-+?�': �� ,�... ' ,"-'�,'�.�: ;� ,_ , � r , f { �� ., «,.�+s � � .. ,� , � "�� i , .",r�' s �' — �#� � �� ' �" '��. �. � � `� �, a,. �. �.� ��x.� , ,. e .� o- ,� �.� �� " #'. � � � � . ��. � � : � A� � , �f � y�-� 3 � sA" ! G.i l. II � "°7 �&'_ � �g��41;,�. �h� 1��. Y¢ i5 . � .� - �� "_ �.... « `.� .�d,"�J � � �` � . ' �i: . k� ��-�Y . �y� Y,'� y:. F�, � � .i` s �, �#li�� .� � • . � . y . 1 , �, f �� '��` � , *t ; " _ ,� �� ; — „ � � .� ,� � w � . fi ' :, �f� �� '' +lf� 1 .�' „�t� � ��F ,. �,, ,�. � 'k,� F.�,� , . . ,,,�' � , ,� �� x�;`� s , �� ....��'�` . �i . t�� y � . � `x , � -� . �€ i . '5yi$41f'�� . ';.I li� �. w. , , ... . .� y � ' ,. � � . : n�; x" �^. � '.: r, _'.: : c K� t�.`��.�b �" .. .... d.� ... . ..... '..... . ..:. .. h. q�.,�, �. ..�..,.._.., r«--... ...... ..-...., .... ....... . . . .._ : .. ..YY�'a t" ' �'. . vr s r , a x � � �', .. �.. .�k. , . >.. � � � . �� r � � 5 � � � �1 �} l� �� ' �4 , 'n�p._ .. . .. „s�m.e.,:•� .s"t� ,,, u �; � �'� `i �;� i� � _ '�� , � � { ,3� ��4� `b t' � � � . .... ... ' ... . .r. .:: . . . , ... t ..Y. ,._. ..... . ....... �. . . . . r.; ��.: . ,. ... '.� . ' p. ` . r1 ' t '. . � ' � t� S � ^�� A� .. il � � �S�F*� � t "t =•1 ; 1 �" �� ert� '�. r rA! ��fd'+ t i , ��'��;�"� � �,.s „� � ��' �� y� � .. ;,,: x. ��', ,�` �� _�„ , :� � ��s r, �:; �„ , `; ; � �'' �k� � � �'n,� .��', ��;� a � � � � �*! ....^yy �✓�. � . �. (�� ' ' t � � M. } t _._. ,.:.... '. '� 't � ' y �""` �,«. i t : � .,......... .` ..t � 3 �, { � . _ . . ; ;: � . � �u;v. , �. . s .. . '``` 1 ` �"' ,.. ps.,n +.. _ # . � �. � � f �� '. � ,r � , i ` �� ; s „ w � � � � � n�;��., � �� { � � �: , :�� ,� � � �, `� i � �-- _ �� . ''� ; � - � : ; , .__ , t 1 C ; � � � ; , � , . .� � , � � � � r� � �� -�� t � � , . , y � � � . , - � , ; � .� � ` .i. t � `� 3 � "� � � � ...'4, i E:: . �" `� ' t � � � � `y� p q � x � ` } � �z � [ ,... 4 � 1 e� ', 7 ax '�";_� � �"t` � � y;, Y} � t � � '' i ! { I � � , . ,� �� * #� �"��° � � j �t � � C � � � � ,� '� � ��_�� "�� ° � 7, ' � � i., � �� J.r9 �� } ae��,I � � � I � � � ,/� ��.� � � � 4 � � � � �. ��y _, � i � � � � T � ` ` �i b��K ��, � t � � � r I � � ., " � � � t � ' M '�J +��h_ �,�� 4" � t� {� �. � ,.,t f :' � I � � . . !. �� .,� ,��'�=� � '� � , �1 �� I , � 1 � . . . _ � { ;�.'�y�'2� } �?,�� f�� k , : . :. ` t `l.�. ,'w_.�� ]�� !� � �� yy ;� � ` � . . t 1 i .(�, ' , -,' � � �. Y ��t t ! j i I � , . ,t � Established in 1962 INV�IGE NO. 7�12g LQ►T SU�V�YS CO�VtPAl��, INC. F.B.�o. - LAND SURVE�ORS SCA�.E: 1" = 20' REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE OF MINNES4TA 16ot 73�ct�,�enue Na,d (f 63)5663093 � Denob�s f,�nd iron Monumern Minncapdia,Mmnnaa 55428 Ftt tJw(!63)560-35?2 Q t�eRotes Itat AAcmument �u��.ex�:�r� ��if�.��t:e ° ��,��,�� .o ��, oeaa.o � �o�a�n«, O'NEILL C�DNSTRUCTION .•�--- sun�ace ora�na�e NO'i'E: areci�ere eubject to rosutts of soil � l�iaposed buYdhp IMom�atbn must bn c�ackad Pmperty located ia Section '�'°�°��1°��°�"B�'t°{ O��li P�betas exceneitlon and consuu�tion... 19,Township 29,Range 24, Rropo�d yredes ahc�a�mm on ttda awva�r ere Henncpin Caunty,Minncsota iflterpolatlona oi prQpoaed contours trom me 4ralt��ara�np 8t�r1/or development plans. MOTE; "tita�tlo�sh�P belwsan propoqed floor e�evations to be vorNbd by buNder. pt`�S Btlljt'.CILitPGfyn PropOsad Tqp o{Bbdc t5restrrtg HarctCO►Kn' Nropo�'�d Cia�pa FbOr Got:4rrn�q 42�'n ft+ Rropase�tl Loweat Fbar �� Top of etxk 86t3.4 Por�h+a 38 5q tt� t�t= l.343 aq lt+ TYPe of Bu�d&�p On�Y'r t�Xf�"" Garoge Flaor 866.6 Wi!!,Deaat and 4VaNk�3 t I �q/ts Tota!Cor�ar+9e 2,02�f ea/t# Per�en�ge� .��- lookout SiII �63.8 First Floor elev �'�9.`� lowest Floor abo'� I �1 �7 Bever.ly Avenue �� 659:9/ 860.28 d60.56 � 4 H S 84°OT2 1"E 5 8g°42'1 O"E � Right of way kne 860.5 --2p.01 - - 20.0 -� 661.2 ! � . 1 � � ,I � � 3 i t!F•3.4 �2.`? Sba.7 �GGqkt � Ploor .:, O 861.2 Gant. u � ' c�n. G9m !Q" v 862.2 c 0 v 964.3 < I 1.� __ - 1 1.0 863.� ! � � � No.,42Q5 � 7.Q i 15.17 e�0.� �R � .6 0 ec�e.� 6.b8/� � /-9-I`rame No.4t2t �f�»datttan " top fouruJshon @TQ. u-1 2-S-Pr � p 6G f.6 s N/0.�4/2T � Bs9-3 m � w � Q � ° �� ~ ° o:�o /�.a � ,� o m 3�/ tf) � � �� Q.50� � ' �� Oalc 30" � i 6.Q 870.2 � N ; � b.1 � � N � � � � __- ��____J N . � 7CJ0 ace.� �.� R.I I OQ Clm B• � �� , '!2 t G63.3 67(?.2 �?.Qf QitvawoY'�u � 863.5 `� ,NOT�l5'W .- �' 'p � ' 'r� 869.5 �' ' C3.43 868..44 • �86'5.�'" . ��cc�' A L L E Y (B�t. 5arfsceJ Bit.Gurb ��23,�z.F.�v�oon �-r�,�,�r o��a.�,�„�+�,►aa��o�►�a a mr«��,�a�a ev�c We�h�eb!►c�r1�►th�t�(s I�e.�ue�i!'t�at repr��tbn a�`a smv�ey'ot tlte t�anurda�fea of the above descrl6ed bnd and!he bcsUon W aM buutl�ps a�nd vlaibb enpo�nts.tt smy.trom or on sekf Ie�ad. s�rveyea by us m�$zan a�y or Fean�a�y Zoos. � $b� ReV �►�1+ �. .�cu,►�ne�.�, ��S� Charbs F. ;Mlnn.Rep.No.21T53 or 4 '�.'0f'OS (,eu� ��a �ss�r •�-e FNe Name 4•'LS.�i s4ri+�c{�.-s+ gvw23-inv7�128.dwp Q"s9�Y R.Prascn,M1nn.Rag.Na.2�892