The URL can be used to link to this page

bza-agenda-oct-27-20 (2) REGULAR MEETING AGENDA This meeting will be held via Webex in accordance with the local emergency declaration made by the City under Minn. Stat. § 12.37. The public may monitor this meeting by calling 1‐415‐655‐0001 and entering the meeting code 133 941 9192. If you incur costs to call into the meeting, you may submit the costs to the City for reimbursement consideration. For technical assistance, please contact the City at 763‐593‐8007 or webexsupport@goldenvalleymn.gov. 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes September 29, 2020, Regular Meeting 4. 6620 Wayzata Boulevard Border Foods dba Taco Bell #2421, Applicant Request: § 113‐151, Off‐Street Parking and Loading, Subd. (c) Minimum Required Off‐Street Parking Spaces: 5 spaces off of the required 79 spaces for a Class II Restaurant to allow for the modification of the parking layout relating to a building addition and garbage enclosure. 5. 832 Meadow Lane South Peter Prudden, Applicant Request: § 113‐88, Single‐Family Density Residential (R‐1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard Setback Requirements: 8 ft. off of the required 30 ft. to a distance of 8 ft. at its closest point to the front yard property line for an open front porch. 6. 5385 Triton Drive Kelsie and David Leonard, Applicants Request: § 113‐88, Single‐Family Density Residential (R‐1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard Setback Requirements: 15 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 20 ft. at its closest point to the front yard property line for garage addition. October 27, 2020 – 7 pm City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting October 27, 2020 – 7 pm 2 7. 2460 Kyle Avenue North Jim and Michelle Shull, Applicants Requests: § 113‐88, Single‐Family Density Residential (R‐1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard Setback Requirements: 6.41 ft. off of the required 3 ft. to a distance of 28.59 ft. at its closest point to the front yard property line for a home addition. § 113‐88, Single‐Family Density Residential (R‐1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard Setback Requirements: 5.41 ft. off of the required 30 ft. to a distance of 24.59 ft. at its closest point to the front yard property line for a deck. 8. Introduction to Just Deeds Project – Presentation by City Attorney Maria Cisneros 9. Adjournment REGULAR MEETING MINUTES This meeting was held via Webex in accordance with the local emergency declaration made by the City under Minn. Stat. § 12.37. In accordance with that declaration, beginning on March 16, 2020, all Board of Zoning Appeals meetings held during the emergency were conducted electronically. The City used Webex to conduct this meeting and members of the public were able to monitor the meeting by calling 1-415-655-0001 and entering the meeting code 133 743 2368. Call To Order The meeting was called to order at 7 pm by Vice-Chair Ginis. Roll Call Members present: Chris Carlson, Sophia Ginis, Nancy Nelson, Richard Orenstein, Ryan Sadeghi– Planning Commissioner Members absent: Kade Arms-Regenold Staff present: Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman and Planner Myles Campbell Approval of Agenda MOTION made by Nelson, seconded by Carlson to approve the agenda of September 22, 2020, as submitted. Staff took a roll call vote and the motion carried unanimously. Approval of Minutes MOTION made by Carlson, seconded by Ginis to approve the August 25, 2020, meeting minutes. Staff took a roll call vote and the motion carried unanimously. 1. 1108 Sumter Ave N Zona and Todd Pederson, Applicant Request: § 113-88, Single-Family Density Residential (R-1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard Setback Requirements 3.58 ft. off of the required 30 ft. to a distance of 26.42 ft. at its closest point to the front yard property line. Myles Campbell, Planner, started by reiterating the request and gave the Board an idea of the home’s location, in the City. He continued to a full background and history of the lot and home, as well as the current porch the homeowner would like to expand. Campbell expanded on the applicant request as well as the existing home size and current setbacks. After reviewing the three items guiding staff analysis, staff found the variance is generally in line with the purpose of the zoning code as well as the regulations for R-1, but lacking a unique circumstance. September 22, 2020 – 7 pm City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting September 22, 2020 – 7 pm 2 Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the variance request of 3.58 ft. off of the required 30 ft. to a distance of 26.42 ft. at its closest point to the front yard property line. Chair Orenstein asked why staff recommended denial when the request seems so minor. Campbell responded that the variance is being requested due to the home’s proximity to the front lot line and it’s not a unique circumstance. The lot has a regular shape and no significant grading challenges. Staff added that if the Board wanted to approve this variance, they could amend it to then bring the existing deck into conformity. The conversation continued on the if the setback would start from the existing structure or from another location. Chair Orenstein invited the applicant to speak. Todd Pederson was speaking on behalf of his mother, the owner of the home. The goal of the deck it to help the applicant’s elderly mother still socialize and see her neighbors through the isolation of Covid. The applicant answered some construction and aesthetic questions from the Board. MOTION was made by Orenstein and seconded by Nancy Nelson to modify the recommendation and moved to approve 6’7” off the 30’ setback for a total distance of 23’5” at its closest point to the front yard property line. Staff called a roll call vote and the motion passed unanimously. 2. 3125 26th Ave N Isaac Murphy, Applicant Request: § 113-88, Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(b) Rear Yard Setback Requirements 23 ft. off the required 25 ft. to a total distance of 2 ft. at its closest point to the rear yard property line. Myles Campbell, Planner, started by stating the applicant’s request and showing a map of the lot’s location; the lot is an irregular shape and a park is located inside the block. There is an alley easement at the rear of the property and the applicant would also like to vacate the alley in order to expand an existing single car garage. The alley is used only by City Public Works in order to attach the park in the interior of the block. Campbell displayed plans illustrating the potential expansion. Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the variance request of 23’ off the required 25’ to a total distance of 2’ at its closest point to the rear yard property line. Staff does support tabling this item until the alley vacation is complete. Nancy Nelson asked the timeline for the vacation. Staff responded they haven’t heard back from their inquiry but typically there’s a 30-day timeframe. Chair Orenstein asked about a large utility box and how that would be impacted. City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting September 22, 2020 – 7 pm 3 Chair Orenstein invited the applicant to speak. The applicant stated that the alley on their side of the block is fenced off and when any utility work is done, workers can’t even pull a vehicle through the alley and opt to access through properties. The applicant added that he wasn’t intending to move the utility box and his garage plans didn’t impact the box. The Chair asked the applicant why he would like to have the variance approved prior to vacation approval. The applicant stated he thought the timing would line up and it was in his interest to move forward. However now it’s late in the season and the project won’t start until spring so he’s comfortable tabling. A MOTION was made by Chair Orenstein and seconded by Nelson to table the item until the alley vacation determination is made. Staff called a roll call vote and the motion passed unanimously. 3. 113 Parkview Terrace Ryan Hanson, Applicant Request: § 113-88, Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(2) Height Requirements 1.5 ft. over the allowed 28 ft. for a total height of 29 ft. 5-1/8 in. Myles Campbell, Planner, started by displaying the lot location in the city, and the rear of the property abuts Theodore Wirth Park. The property has a curve in the front property line but is otherwise a regularly shaped lot. The lot has a steep slope in the front yard, and the rear is flat next to the home. The applicant would like to tear down the home and build a new 3-story house. The rear grading will be filled in to correct negative sloping. Campbell reviewed zoning regulations and how building height is determined. Staff finds the variance is generally in line with the zoning code and the home fits with some of the goals in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for environmentally sustainable housing. Being that this is a new build, staff would like to see the 1.5’ corrected in design than through a variance. Staff presented a number of possibilities. Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the variance request of 1.5’ over the allowed 28’ for a total height of 29’ 5 1/8” for a new home, measured from the average grade to the midpoint of the highest pitched roof. Chair Orenstein asked for clarification on how the rear grade impacts the build. Staff stated that the average grade is determined by the front grade but the applicant wants to adjust the exterior in order to maintain and interior flow from the main floor to the rear yard. Staff is asking if the main City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting September 22, 2020 – 7 pm 4 floor is lowered and design altered, could the height of the overall building then comply with regulations. Chair Orenstein invited the applicant to speak. The applicant stated the restrictions in floor to ceiling height, restrictions on the average grade, and not being able to change the grade of the driveway so it can maintain usability in the winter. The homeowner’s goal is to maximize the rear yard as the front yard is very steep and won’t be usable for use. Ryan Sadeghi asked about lowering the pitch of the roof and the applicant stated they need to maintain the pitch in order to maintain warranty on the roof material, the material is a TPO membrane. Sophia Ginis asked why the architects didn’t consider staff recommendations. The applicant stated that they’re trying to create a step-up layout so the front plane has a smaller presence and the house doesn’t appear to tower as high. The conversation continued in to ceiling heights, roofing material, average grade, garage location, parcel shape, and aesthetic. The Board continued to ask for more details about design to look for alternatives so the builder won’t require a variance. Chair Orenstein opened the public forum and commented a letter had also been sent to the Board, prior to the meeting. The owner of 106 France Ave S, called for comment and stated this build will have a negative impact on them and their home. The new build will be 10 feet taller than the current home and the increase in size will have a patio abut this homeowner’s patio. The homeowner stated they don’t want to tell the builders and new owners what to do but wanted to express the impacts this variance and overall build will have on them. The Board discussed options after the commenter and Commissioner Sadeghi pointed out that since this is a new build, code should take precedence in his mind and he’s inclined to agree with staff recommendation. He recognized aesthetic and design but the build should be amended to be built by-right. A number of Board members echoed this statement. The architect responded and explained design elements as well as empathized with the neighbors. A MOTION was made by Chair Orenstein and seconded by Nelson to not follow staff recommendation and instead approve the variance request of 1.5 ft. over the allowed 28 ft. height requirement for a total building height of 29 ft. 5-1/8 in. Staff called a roll call vote: Aye: Carlson, Orenstein, Nelson Nay: Ginis; Sadaghi The motion carried, 3 to 2, to approve the variance request. City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting September 22, 2020 – 7 pm 5 Adjournment MOTION made by Nelson, seconded by Orenstein and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 8:38 pm. Staff called a roll call vote and the motion passed unanimously. ________________________________ Richard Orenstein, Chair _________________________________ Amie Kolesar, Planning Assistant Date: October 27, 2020 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Myles Campbell, Planner Subject: 6620 Wayzata Boulevard Border Foods, Applicant Introduction Border Foods, operator of the Taco Bell restaurant at 6620 Wayzata Boulevard, are seeking a variance from the City Code to modify their parking lot layout to allow for a new trash enclosure and frozen storage in the restaurant. The applicant is seeking the following variances from City Code: Variance Request City Code Requirement The applicant is requesting a variance of 5 spaces off of the required 79 spaces for a Restaurant ‐ Class II (fast food), to allow for the modification of the parking layout relating to a building addition and garbage enclosure. § 113‐151, Off‐Street Parking and Loading, Subd. (c) Minimum Required Off‐Street Parking Spaces Class II Restaurants: 1 space per 40 square feet of gross floor area Background 6620 Wayzata Boulevard is a commercially zoned property north of Interstate 394. Taco Bell has been located on the site dating back to the mid‐1980’s, though originally only on the western portion of the property. In 1998, 6620 Wayzata Blvd and the neighboring 950 Florida Ave S were combined into a larger single parcel, with the existing carwash at 950 Florida being demolished. The lot consolidation and subsequent Conditional Use Permit allowed for the Taco Bell location to expand it’s provided parking and to open a drive‐through window option off the north portion of the building. In terms of its existing parking conditions, there are 71 current parking spaces, 3 being handicap accessible. In addition as part of the Conditional Use Permits original approval, an additional 6 proof of parking spaces were shown to the north of the drive‐through aisle, with a condition stating that “These spaces must be constructed when, in the opinion of the Director of Planning, there is a need for the 2 spaces.” This condition has never been acted upon by any current or previous planning directors, as typically the site has had ample parking for its peak hours of operation. Summary of Requests Separate from this variance, the applicant is seeking to amend its existing conditional use permit in order to allow for some updates to the restaurant location. Border Foods is seeking to move their existing parking enclosure, eliminating a handful of parking spaces, the adjusted trash enclosure would allow for a small addition off the rear of the building for an internal freezer measuring 240 sq. ft. As a result of these improvements, three existing parking spaces would be lost due to the relocated trash enclosure, and the freezer addition also increases the building’s gross floor area. In the City’s Zoning requirements for minimum off‐street parking, a Class II (fast food) Restaurant is required to provide 1 space per 40 sq. ft. of gross floor area. There is no distinction made in code for floor area devoted to customers, food prep, or storage. The table below shows the number of spaces required/provided for both the existing parking layout and the proposed layout. Gross Floor Area Parking Required Parking Provided Existing Layout 2921 sq. ft. 73 spaces 71 (+6 proof of parking) Proposed Layout 3161 sq. ft. 79 spaces 68 (+6 proof of parking) In both cases, the actual provided parking on site is less than the required 1 per 40 sq. ft. However, in the existing layout this shortfall is made up for by the six proof of parking spaces established as a condition of the 1998 CUP. In the case of the proposed layout, while the proof of parking spaces could be paved, this alone would not provide enough spaces to meet the new minimum of 79 spaces. This is also in part due to the increase in spaces required because of the freezer addition. At 240 sq. ft. the freezer would create a need for 6 additional parking spaces. The addition of the freezer itself would not increase or decrease parking demand on the site, and the applicant points out that the freezer will allow for a reduction in total deliveries to the site. Including the proof of parking, the proposed layout would require a variance for the 5 remaining spaces required. In discussions with other departmental staff about the proof of parking, generally there was not seen to be a demand for the spaces to be paved. Environmental engineers expressed an interest in keeping that area as greenspace, given the relatively high level of impervious surface on the site already. Additionally, city engineers noted that the demand for parking on‐site seems to be met adequately by the current spaces, and that peak hour traffic is mostly related to the drive‐ through. Analysis In reviewing this application, staff has maintained the points of examination to the considerations outlined in Minnesota State Statute 462.357 – that the requested variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Chapter, that it is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and that a property exhibit “practical difficulties” in order for a variance to be granted. 3 Staff finds that the variance is generally in line with both the purpose of the Zoning Code, it’s Commercial zoning district purpose, and it’s off‐street parking requirements. The parking provided on‐site, while less than prescribed by code, seems be adequate for the peak hours of operation. This is a commercial use, and follows with the intent of that district to serve customers and in its location off of I‐394. In reviewing the request for consistency with the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, staff also found that the plans mostly matched the intent and goals of the plan’s land use chapter, and specifically those related to the redevelopment, environmental, and multi‐modal transportation. This variance would allow the applicant to maintain the existing greenspaces on‐site and avoid increasing stormwater runoff, while still improving the functionality of the restaurant. In order to constitute practical difficulties: 1. The property owner must propose to use the property in a reasonable manner. A restaurant in a commercial district is a reasonable use, and has a conditional use permit already to operate in such a fashion. The proposed addition is reasonable in scale and its impact on parking. 2. The landowners’ problem must be due to circumstances unique to the property that is not caused by the landowner. Given this is an existing building and business, the applicant is here limited by the lot itself in order to create new parking spaces. Additional spaces are likely impossible without severely shrinking the interior drive aisles, which would impact circulation on site. As noted earlier, staff were not interested in paving the proof of parking spaces, as this action would increase the already high level of impervious surface and potentially create issues for the existing stormwater system on‐site. 3. And the variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality Visual changes to the site would be minor, and would not impact the local character of the area. Additionally, staff assesses whether other options are available to meet the applicant’s needs without requiring a variance, or whether the proposal requests the smallest variance necessary to meet the applicant’s needs. Given the constraints of the site in creating new parking, this variance seems rational and the smallest possible variance to allow the CUP amendment. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance request of 5 spaces off of the required 79 spaces for a Restaurant ‐ Class II (fast food). 10.05.2020 VARIANCE SITE PLAN1" = 10'-0"1KEYNOTES21.NEW STORAGE ADDTION2.NEW TRASH ENCLOSURE3.NEW ACCESSIBLE RAMP AND SIGNAGE4.NEW ACCESSIBLE PAINT STRIPINGGENERAL NOTES1.ACCESSIBLE PARKING STRIPING AND INTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OFACCESSIBILITY TO BE PAINTED TO MEET CITY REQUIREMENTS.2.ALL EXISTING TREES, BUSHES, SHRUBS & LANDSCAPING MATERIALS ARE TO BETRIMMED AS NECESSARY, IF NOT ALREADY DONE AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTION.VERIFY REQUIREMENTS WITH OWNER.3.IDENTIFY EXISTING WATER IRRIGATION HEADS AND PIPING LOCATIONS PRIORTO REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION OF LANDSCAPE MATERIALS. TAKEPRECAUTIONS NOT TO DAMAGE THEM, OTHERWISE LANDSCAPER WILLREPAIR/REPLACE AT LANDSCAPERS COST.4.ALL NEW PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE WATERED AND MAINTAINED UNTILACCEPTANCE.5.SWEEP AND MAINTAIN ALL PAVED SURFACES FREE OF DEBRIS OFCONSTRUCTION AND LANDCSAPE MATERIALS.6.ALL NOISE GENERATED FOR THE STORE SHALL BE COMPLIANT WITH SECTION401.15.B.11 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE7.ALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING FOR THE PARKING AREAS SHALL BE BE TURNED OFFONE HOUR AFTER CLOSING, EXCEPT FOR APPROVED SECURITY LIGHTING-KEYNOTEGENERAL NOTES3NOTETHIS PLAN HAS BEEN CREATEDUSING PREVIOUS SITE PLANINFORMATION AND VISUALOBSERVATIONS OF EXISTINGFEATURES . NO SURVEY HAS BEENCOMPLETED TO VERIFY EXISTNGCONDITIONS. CONTRACTOR SHALLFIELD VERIFY QUANTITIES,MEASUREMENTS, AND FIELDCONDITIONS PRIOR TO BIDDING.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FORCOMPLYING WITH "YUM" BRANDSSPECIFICATIONS AND PART OF THEBID PRICE FOR WORK TO BECOMPLETED.WAYZATA BLVDNOTE: CONTRACTOR IS TO VERIFYALL EXISTING UTILITY CONNECTIONSIN CONFLICT WITH NEW ADDITIONAND NOTIFY OWNER OF ANYCONFLICTS PRIOR TO START OFCONSTRUCTION58'-4"24'-1"47'-8"10'-0"10'-0"11'-4"SITEFLORIDA AVEEXISTINGTACOBELL121517891018192728363743445758686 PROOF OF PARKINGPARKING CALCULATIONS4VICINITY MAP5C2.0SITE PLANSignature :Name :Registration :Print HistoryDateProjectCheckedDrawnProject Contact :Phone Number :Dean Madson952-541-9969Plotted:9/21/2020 2:19 PM File: D:\Users\Dean_m\Desktop\_shortcuts\02 Projects\tb Golden Valley Bumpout\40_CONSTR DOCS\011_C2-0_SitePlan_Enclosure_20190617.dwg By:Dean Madson 123Border Foods5425 Boone Ave N.New Hope,MN 55428----------------6620 WAYZATA BLVDGOLDEN VALLEY, MNSTORE #: 2421Ryan Schroeder50047I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me orunder my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensedarchitect under the laws of the State of MinnesotaRSDSMADDITION2,921 GSF?? SEATS2019.0617 / 19284TACO BELL6620 WAYZATA BLVDGOLDEN VALLEY, MN10.05.2020VARIANCE KITCHENWOMENMENWALK-INCOOLERENTRYCUSTOMERAREAOFFICETRASHSTORAGEDRIVETHRUSERVICECOUNTERDISHMECHFOODPREPCLOSETBREAKSODAWALK-INFREEZERSTORAGESTORAGECOOKKB-104KB-104KB-104KB-106KB-104 KB-104KB-104KB-103KB-104KB-104KB-104KB-103FLOOR PLAN1/4"=1'-0"AFLOOR PLAN KEY NOTESBGENERAL NOTES1.AFTER DEMOLITION BUT BEFORE STARTING NEW CONSTRUCTION VERIFY EXTENTOF DAMAGED INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR AREAS AND VERIFY WITH OWNER FOR THEEXTENT OF REPAIRS.2.GC TO REMOVE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION & FINISHES ON WALLS & FLOORS ASNECESSARY FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING M.E.P WORK. GC TO PATCH,REPAIR & FINISH WALLS & FLOORS TO MATCH EXISTING.3.ALL JOINTS, GAPS AND SPACES LEADING TO HOLLOW OR INACCESSIBLE SPACESARE TO BE SEALED WITH NSF APPROVED SEALANTS.4.GC TO REMOVE ANY EXISTING EXTERIOR CONCRETE SLABS, SIDEWALKS,LANDSCAPE MATERIALS AND EARTH FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.5.ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR IS TO REVIEW EXISTING ELECTRICAL PANELS AND NEWPOWER REQUIREMENTS OF COOLER/FREEZER, ETC. TO DETERMINE IF EXISTINGPANELS ARE CAPABLE OF HANDLING ADDITIONAL POWER/BREAKERS. IF NOTCONTACT ARCHITECT FOR DIRECTION.6.ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE POWER TO ALL NEW LIGHTING.7. IF REQUIRED, GC TO PROVIDE ROOF PENETRATION AND REFRIGERATION /ELECTRICAL PIPING HOOD FOR NEW COOLER / FREEZER CONDENSER ON ROOF.SEAL WATER & WEATHER TIGHT.VERIFY LOCATION WITH OWNER.8. REFER TO EXTERIOR ELEVATION DRAWING SHEETS FOR EXTERIOR MATERIALFINISHES AND COLORS.1.NEW PREFAB STORAGE ADDITION2.NEW TRASH ENCLOSUREKEYNOTE#NEW PREFAB COOLER BOX:FLOOR PLAN NOTESCWALL LEGENDETYPICAL EXISTING EXTERIOR WALL:2x6 (ASSUMED) WOOD STUDS @16"O.C. W/ 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING.2"23'-10"10'-0"10'-2"12'-0"6'-4"4"16'-6"9'-4"25'-4"KITCHENWOMENMENWALK-INCOOLERENTRYDINING CUSTOMERAREAOFFICE TRASHSTORAGEDRIVETHRUSERVICECOUNTERDISHMECHFOODPREPCLOSETSIDEENTRYBREAKSODAWALK-INFREEZERSTORAGESTORAGECOOKKB-104KB-104KB-104 KB-106KB-104 KB-104KB-104KB-103KB-104KB-104KB-104KB-103KEY PLANGSignature :Name :Registration :Print HistoryDateProjectCheckedDrawnProject Contact :Phone Number :Dean Madson952-541-9969D:\Users\Dean_m\Desktop\_shortcuts\02 Projects\tb Golden Valley Bumpout\40_CONSTR DOCS\040_A1-0_FloorPlan_20190617.dwg 123Border Foods5425 Boone Ave N.New Hope,MN 55428----------------6620 WAYZATA BLVDGOLDEN VALLEY, MNSTORE #: 2421Ryan Schroeder50047I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me orunder my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensedarchitect under the laws of the State of MinnesotaRSDSMADDITION2,921 GSF?? SEATS2019.0617 / 19284TACO BELL6620 WAYZATA BLVDGOLDEN VALLEY, MNA1.0FLOOR PLAN10.05.2020VARIANCE 1 Date: To: From: October 27, 2020 Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Subject: 832 Meadow Lane North Peter Prudden, Applicant Introduction Peter Prudden, the property owner, is seeking a variance from the City Code to construct an addition to the eastern portion of his home which would extend into the front yard setback area. The applicant is seeking the following variance from City Code: Variance Request City Code Requirement The applicant is requesting a variance of 8 ft. off of the required 30 ft. to a distance of 22 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line. §113‐89, Moderate Density Residential (R‐2) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard Setback Requirements The required minimum front setback shall be 35 feet from any front lot line along a street right‐of‐ way line. Decks and open front porches, with no screens, may be built to within 30 feet for a front lot line along a street right‐of‐way line. Background 832 Meadow Lane South is a 15,571 square foot single‐family residential lot located in the southwest corner of the intersection of Meadow Lane South with Parkview Terrace. Due to its location adjacent to two rights‐of‐way, it is defined as a corner lot and therefore has two front yards (along Meadow Lane S and along Parkview Terrace), each having a setback of 35 feet from the property line or 30 feet for a deck or open front porch. The existing house was constructed in 1938 and sits 40.8 feet from the east property line at its closest point. 2 Summary of Request The applicant is proposing to construct a significant addition to the east side of the house, providing a new open porch as well as remodeling and expanding the interior spaces currently occupied by the dining room and kitchen. This would result in an encroachment of the open porch into the front yard by 8 feet, resulting in a front yard setback of only 22 feet at its closest point. The applicant indicates that the size of the proposed open porch is necessary to accommodate a comfortable seating arrangement and would not require the removal of existing trees or landscaping. The applicant also states that the size of the addition has been designed to balance the massing, roof line, and architectural character of the home. Staff notes that several mature trees were removed from the yard within the last few years in the area being targeted for the addition. The applicant also provided to staff a list of 18 corner lot properties in the North Tyrol area that contained homes he believed extended into the front yard setback area. While roughly a third of these did have variances on file with the City, the majority were found to be conforming with respect to the front yard setback or were old enough to have a legally nonconforming status. 3 Analysis In reviewing this application, staff has maintained the points of examination to the considerations outlined in Minnesota State Statute 462.357 – that the requested variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Chapter, that it is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and that a property exhibit “practical difficulties” in order for a variance to be granted. Staff finds that the variance is generally in line with the purpose of the Zoning Code as well as the purpose of the Single‐Family Residential Zoning District, which is to provide for detached single‐ family dwelling units at a low density along with directly related and complementary uses. The request would not allow for additional unit density in the neighborhood and the proposed addition would not have any egregious impact on the welfare of neighboring properties. In the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, one of the stated objectives of the Land Use Chapter is to protect existing residential neighborhoods. Staff feels that this request would not cause harm to the neighborhood at large. Additionally, in the Comprehensive Plan’s Housing Chapter is an objective to support the rehabilitation and reinvestment of the housing stock as structures continue to age. This type of reinvestment in mid‐century homes helps to keep these properties in good repair and increase their usability by residents. In order to constitute practical difficulties: 1. The property owner must propose to use the property in a reasonable manner. An open front porch is a reasonable use of a residential property as a means of creating additional usable space. However, the design of the porch as proposed by the applicant is quite large and a similar outcome could be achieved while avoiding most or all of the need for a variance. Therefore, staff believes the use of the property as proposed by the owner is not reasonable. 2. The landowners’ problem must be due to circumstances unique to the property that is not caused by the landowner. Although corner lots can present a challenge for owners looking to expand the footprint of their homes, the location of the existing home at 832 Meadow Lane South does allow for some amount of expansion by right. The reduced front setback requirement for open porches provides additional room in which to contemplate an addition. Further, the size of the lot, at over 15,500 square feet, does not present many of the limitations observed in other, smaller, corner lots across the city. Given the flexibility to design for an addition in this setting, staff does not believe the problem is due to a circumstance unique to the property. 3. And the variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality As the applicant has pointed out, there are a handful of homes on corner lots in the North Tyrol area that have front yard setbacks of less than 35 feet. Many of these homes utilize this space for a garage, while others have been constructed closer to the right‐of‐way than is currently allowed under the zoning regulations. One such property is the adjacent 1045 Tyrol 4 Trail, which received a variance in 1982 to construct a garage within 14.6 feet of the front property line. Staff believes a front yard variance for an open porch would not alter the essential character of the area. Additionally, staff assesses whether other options are available to meet the applicant’s needs without requiring a variance, or whether the proposal requests the smallest variance necessary to meet the applicant’s needs. Given the position of the existing structure on the lot, there is room within the front yard setback to allow for a conforming open porch to be constructed that would not require a variance. While this would not be as large as the proposed porch, it would still provide a significant new usable area. As shown, the proposed porch extends approximately 5 feet to the southeast beyond the new front plane of the main structure. Reducing the size of the porch to align with the rest of the home would still require a variance, but one of only approximately 3 feet. Staff would feel more comfortable considering this smaller variance that has a reduced impact on the front yard compared to the one currently proposed by the applicant. Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the variance request of 8 ft. off of the required 30 ft. for an open porch to a distance of 22 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line. UP DN 1 A3.0 2 A3.0 4 A3.0 1 A4.0 3 A3.0 5' - 0"7' - 0"WET BAR KITCHEN LIVING ROOM DINING ROOM FOYER OFFICE MASTER BEDROOM CLOSET BATH LAUNDRY HALL POWDER ROOM PORCH NEW WALL 9' - 8"13' - 6"ADDITION16' - 1 1/2"ADDED PORCH5' - 6 1/2"ADDED PORCH16' - 0"8' - 3"13' - 4"22' - 10"11' - 0"NEW WALL8' - 4"NEW OPENING TO BELOW NEW POSTS GUARDRAIL AND HANDRAIL PANEL READY BUILT-IN COUNTER DEPTH REFRIGERAT0R FULL HEIGHT CABINETS OVEN AND GAS RANGE WITH HOOD 20" DEEP COUNTER/CABINETS WITH BAR SINK AND UPPER SHELVES COUNTER WITH DRAWERS BELOW FULL HEIGHT CABINETS WITH ROD AND SHELF DOUBLE ROD WITH SHELFROD & SHELF24" DEEP COUNTER/CABINETS WITH LAUNDRY SINK AND UPPER WALL CABINET ISLAND WITH WALL AND CABINETS BELOW VAULTED CEILING (SCISSOR TRUSSES) ABOVE 14" SQ COLUMNS, TYP ALL OPENINGS TO BE CASED, TYP BASEMENT BELOW. PROVIDE NEW WATERPROF ING GARAGE BELOW. PROVIDE NEW WATERPROF ING NEW GLASS DOORS WITH METAL FRAME, SEE OWNER FOR PRODUCT NEW FIREPLACE SURROUND, SEE OWNER FOR PRODUCT 1' - 2 1/8"1' - 5 1/2"3' - 6 1/2"3' - 6 1/2"3' - 6 1/2"2' - 7 5/8"3' - 6 1/2"3' - 6 1/2"2' - 7 5/8" 3 A4.0 2 A4.0 2' - 9 5/8"2' - 11 3/8" 3' - 4"7' - 8 1/4"7' - 8 1/4"3' - 4"6' - 2 1/4"EQ EQ EQ EQ 2' - 4"EQEQ11' - 3 1/2"11' - 3 1/2"9' - 2"8' - 9" PANTRY 3' - 3"5' - 0"3' - 0" OVERHEAD BEAM 2 2 '1 3 'PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINE3 5 ' - 0 " YELLOW SHADING DEPICTS THE AREA OF PORCH ENCROACHMENT INTO SETBACK 1 A3.0 2 A3.0 4 A3.0 1 A4.0 3 A3.0 3 A4.0 2 A4.0 NEW PORCH ROOF NEW DINING ROOM ROOF NEW DORMER ROOF NEW DORMER ROOF NEW DORMER ROOF NEW BAY WINDOW ROOF EXISTING TERRACE EXISTING CONCRETE WALK EXISTING BITUMINOUS DRIVE EXISTING PLAYHOUSE EXISTING CONCRETE WALK EXISTING STONE LANDSCAPE WALL EXISTING STOOP PROPERTY LINEP R O P E R T Y L I N E P R O P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY LINEEXISTING HOUSE 1 5' - 0" 2 5 ' - 0 " 3 5 ' - 0 " M EA D O W LA N E PARKVIEW8 3 2 M E A D O W L A N E S O U T H , G O L D E N V A L L E Y 35' - 0" B A C K S E T B A C K F R O N T S E T B A C K SIDE SET BACKFRONT SET BACKNEW KITCHEN ADDITION 5 ' - 0 "1 5 ' - 0 "25' - 0" NEW WORKOUT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE A C C E S S A R Y S E T B A C KAC CESSARY STRUCTURE SET BACK14' 8' YELLOW SHADING DEPICTS THE AREA OF PORCH ENCROACHMENT INTO SETBACK 2 2 ' - 0 " PRUDDEN RESIDENCE ADDITION AND REMODEL A0.1 PROGRESS SET 9/28/20 SITE PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"A0.1 1 SITE PLAN 1 Date: To: From: Subject: October 27, 2020 Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager 5385 Triton Drive Kelsie and David Leonard, Applicants Introduction Kelsie and David Leonard, the property owners at 5385 Triton Drive, are seeking a variance from the City Code to construct a garage addition for a second stall to the western side of their home which would extend into the front yard setback area. The applicants are seeking the following variance from City Code: Variance Request City Code Requirement The applicant is requesting a variance of 15 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 20 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line. §113‐89, Moderate Density Residential (R‐2) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard Setback Requirements The required minimum front setback shall be 35 feet from any front lot line along a street right‐of‐ way line. Background 5385 Triton Drive is a 22,114 square foot single‐family residential lot located in the southeast corner of the intersection of Triton Drive with a frontage road east of Hwy 100 (Lilac Drive). Due to its location adjacent to two rights‐of‐way, it is defined as a corner lot and therefore has two front yards, each having a setback of 35 feet from the property line. The existing house was constructed in 1959 and sits 35.28 feet from the west property line at its closest point. A vegetated boulevard of approximately 30 feet separates the western edge of the property from the paved frontage road. A sound wall separates the frontage road from Hwy 100. Valley Community Presbyterian Church is located to the north of this property, across Triton Drive. 2 Summary of Request The applicant is proposing to construct a garage addition to create a second garage stall alongside the existing single stall in the attached garage. The existing stall is 12 feet 8 inches wide and the second stall would be 15 feet 3‐1/16 inches wide. This would mean an encroachment of the structure into the front yard by 15 feet, resulting in a front yard setback of only 20 feet at its closest point. The applicants are requesting the variance in order to increase the functionality of their home with a second garage stall. They state that the presence of the frontage road and highway to the west, along with the tree cover provided within the boulevard, would result in little to no impact to the surrounding area. Analysis In reviewing this application, staff has maintained the points of examination to the considerations outlined in Minnesota State Statute 462.357 – that the requested variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Chapter, that it is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and that a property exhibit “practical difficulties” in order for a variance to be granted. 3 Staff finds that the variance is generally in line with the purpose of the Zoning Code as well as the purpose of the Single‐Family Residential Zoning District, which is to provide for detached single‐ family dwelling units at a low density along with directly related and complementary uses. The request would not allow for additional unit density in the neighborhood and the proposed addition would not have any egregious impact on the welfare of neighboring properties. In the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, one of the stated objectives of the Land Use Chapter is to protect existing residential neighborhoods. Staff feels that this request would not cause harm to the neighborhood at large. Additionally, in the Comprehensive Plan’s Housing Chapter is an objective to support the rehabilitation and reinvestment of the housing stock as structures continue to age. Adding a second garage stall helps to raise the value of the property and make it more desirable in the long run. In order to constitute practical difficulties: 1. The property owner must propose to use the property in a reasonable manner. The Board has consistently found that a second garage stall is a reasonable use for a modern home. The proposed location for the addition is logical given the placement of the existing home on the lot, and the large vegetated boulevard would screen the new addition from view from the frontage road. Therefore, staff believes the use of the property as proposed by the owner is reasonable. 2. The landowners’ problem must be due to circumstances unique to the property that is not caused by the landowner. While corner lots are prevalent throughout the city, fewer are located along a frontage road and soundwall for a major highway. The existing conditions, coupled with an exceptionally wide vegetated boulevard, are sufficient to distinguish this lot from many others. Staff believes the circumstances of this situation are unique and not caused by the landowner. 3. And the variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality Due to the presence of the frontage road and soundwall, the essential character of the area is focused to the east towards other single‐family homes. Any visual impact created by the construction of the garage addition to the west would be minimal. Staff believes a front yard variance for a garage addition would not alter the essential character of the area. Additionally, staff assesses whether other options are available to meet the applicant’s needs without requiring a variance, or whether the proposal requests the smallest variance necessary to meet the applicant’s needs. Given the size of the lot and location of the existing home, one alternative for second garage stall would be the construction of a detached garage to the south. However, this would likely require an additional curb cut along the frontage road, an extension of electrical service, and the removal of trees within the boulevard. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance request of 15 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 20 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (west) property line. 1 Date: To: From: Subject: October 27, 2020 Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager 2460 Kyle Avenue North Jim and Michelle Shull, Applicants Introduction Jim and Michelle Shull, the property owners at 2460 Kyle Avenue North, are seeking the following variances from the City Code to construct an addition to the front of their home which would extend into the front yard setback area: Variance Request City Code Requirement The applicant is requesting a variance of 6.41 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 28.59 ft. at its closest point to the front yard property line for a home addition. §113‐89, Moderate Density Residential (R‐2) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard Setback Requirements The required minimum front setback shall be 35 feet from any front lot line along a street right‐of‐ way line. The applicant is requesting a variance of 5.41 ft. off of the required 30 ft. to a distance of 24.59 ft. at its closest point to the front yard property line for a deck. §113‐89, Moderate Density Residential (R‐2) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard Setback Requirements The required minimum front setback for decks and open front porches shall be 30 feet from any front lot line along a street right‐of‐way line. Background 2460 Kyle Avenue North is an 18,821 square foot single‐family residential lot that backs up to Sochacki Park. It is positioned on the outside of a slight curve in the road creating a front yard setback that is not parallel to front of the structure on the lot. The existing house was constructed in 1960 and there is currently a well room that sits below the front stoop and within the front setback area. This room 2 reportedly leaks cold air into the house and reduces the energy efficiency of the structure. In addition, a small upper level and crowded interior entrance area are concerns for the applicants. Summary of Request The applicants are proposing to enclose the front stoop, covering the well room below and providing adequate insulation for the home. This would also create a larger enclosed entrance space. In addition, the applicants would like to construct a low deck outside the front door extending to the south towards the driveway. This new deck would allow for the removal of pavers currently leading from the driveway to the front door. The current structure is located at the required front setback line of 35 feet. The enclosed addition would be 6.41 feet deep, potentially reducing the front setback to 28.59 feet. The new deck would extend 4 additional feet towards the street, reducing that setback to 24.59 feet compared to the required 30 feet for decks and open porches. The applicants cite energy efficiency updates to their home, the need to enclose/insulate the basement well room, and a desire to create a more functional entrance area as reasons for their variance request. Analysis In reviewing this application, staff has maintained the points of examination to the considerations outlined in Minnesota State Statute 462.357 – that the requested variance is in harmony with the 3 general purposes and intent of the Zoning Chapter, that it is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and that a property exhibit “practical difficulties” in order for a variance to be granted. Staff finds that the variance is generally in line with the purpose of the Zoning Code as well as the purpose of the Single‐Family Residential Zoning District, which is to provide for detached single‐ family dwelling units at a low density along with directly related and complementary uses. The request would not allow for additional unit density in the neighborhood and the proposed addition would not have any egregious impact on the welfare of neighboring properties. In the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, one of the stated objectives of the Land Use Chapter is to protect existing residential neighborhoods. Staff feels that this request would not cause harm to the neighborhood at large. Additionally, in the Comprehensive Plan’s Housing Chapter is an objective to support the rehabilitation and reinvestment of the housing stock as structures continue to age. Providing an enclosed entrance area that increases the energy efficiency of the home would help to raise the value of the property and make it more desirable in the long run. In order to constitute practical difficulties: 1. The property owner must propose to use the property in a reasonable manner. Construction of an enclosed front entrance is reasonable, especially given the dual purpose of helping to solve a larger issue of a substandard basement space below the front stoop as well as providing an entry more appropriately sized for modern standards. Staff believes the use of the property as proposed by the owners is reasonable. 2. The landowners’ problem must be due to circumstances unique to the property that is not caused by the landowner. The current owners did not build the home and inherited the outdated and problematic well room at the front of the house. The location of the home at the front setback line means that the issue already sits within the front setback area and makes addressing it more challenging that would otherwise be the case. Solving the problem requires a creative solution. Staff believes the circumstances of this situation are unique and not caused by the landowner. 3. And the variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality The location of the addition would result in a minimal visual impact due to its location on the outside of the curve of the road. Due to the low height of the deck, this structure would likely be unnoticed from the public right‐of‐way. Staff believes a front yard variance for this proposal would not alter the essential character of the area. Additionally, staff assesses whether other options are available to meet the applicant’s needs without requiring a variance, or whether the proposal requests the smallest variance necessary to meet the applicant’s needs. Given the location of the entrance to the home and the existing well 4 room beneath the front stoop which extends into the front yard, there appear to be no better options to address the existing problems. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance request of 6.41 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 28.59 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (west) property line for a home addition. Staff recommends approval of the variance request of 5.41 ft. off of the required 30 ft. to a distance of 24.59 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (west) property line for a deck. SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 554491 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJCOVER PAGESHULL REMODEL PAGE # CONTENTS INDEX NOTES: SYMBOLS LEGEND MDJ 1.) These plans and specifications are the property of Murphy Bros. Any reproduction of these plans and/or specifications are prohibited without written consent. 2.) All dimensions to be site verified. Exterior/Overall dimensions (if needed for project) are to be off the exterior side of the framing on the exterior walls. On the Interior walls on the Exterior/Overall dimensions will be to interior wall centers and centers on wall openings. Added interior dimensions would be to the wall finishes. Unless otherwise noted. Dimensions on Cross-Sections & Wall Elevations would be to the wall finishes. Unless otherwise noted. 3.) The information, specifications and plans contained on these pages are a result of job site measurements, sub-contractor recommendations, and client consultations. Any unforeseen pre-existing conditions may require change orders and the alteration of the proposed construction plans. 6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJ 1. COVER PAGE 2. EXISTING PLAN 3. EXISTING PLAN 4. SURVEY W/ PROPOSED 5. PROPOSED PLAN 6. DEMO PLANS 7. EXISTING ELECTRICAL 8. PROPOSED ELECTRICAL 9. EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 10. CROSS -SECTIONS 11. CABINET ELEVATIONS 12. CABINET ELEVATIONS 13. RENDERINGS 8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ DN B28BCB19RBCB17RSB36B24RB15RB841916SB221832RB391832 B28BCB19RBCB17RSB36B24RB15RB841916SB221832RB391832 U392584W3142W84122 HB BCW1842R BCW3142W2842160702668 30682128SC 51068 10954TC 4344DC 4344DC 41034DC4644DC4235DC4244DC 28682234SC4234DC 36684940PT 40683668 2068416824682668 1122FX 2422FX516826682668 206826685068 2668 5068 6068 11068 EXISTING ELECTRICALIN BLUEEXISTING CONNECTIONARE SOLID NEW ELECTRICAL IN REDNEW CONNECTION LINESARE DASHEDELECTRICAL KEYELECTRICAL KEY S1S1 19'-11 1/4"11'-4 3/8"17'-5 3/4"21' 69'-9 3/8" 21'-2 7/16"10'-5 3/4"16'-5 11/16"21'-7 1/2" 69'-9 3/8"23'6'-5 7/8"5'-10 11/16"1'-10 1/8"3'-5 1/8"5'-5 3/4"3'-4 15/16"4'-9 3/16"29'-0 3/8"6'-4 3/4"4'-9 3/16"12'-0 7/8"2'4'-1 5/16"1'-8 9/16"9'-0 3/16"1438 SQ FT LIVING AREA KITCHEN DINING CLOSETOPEN BELOW JAMB: 5-1/4" BUILT IN SILL GARAGE PORCH DECK LIVING FIRE-PLACEBEDROOMBEDROOM CLOSETCLOSET CLOSET MASTER BDRM HALL CLOSET M. BATH BATH C ENTRY CONCRETE PORCH OVER WELL ROOM SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 554492 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJEXISTING PLANMDJ EXISTING FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" EXISTING FRONT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" EXISTING LEFT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJ 8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ SSS S SB362132SB362132HB 26682668 2268 2066 2668 3068 3168 306830682243DH 30683540DH3540DH9740MU3068 2818AW2826AW2826AW 266820682068DN UP S1S1 WORK-OUTFAMILY SAUNA HALL FAMILY STAIRSFIRE-PLACECLOSETHALL BATHBEDROOM CLOSET UTILITY WELL ROOM SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 554493 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJ MDJ EXISTING FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" EXISTING FRONT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" EXISTING LEFT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJEXISTING PLAN8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ EGRESS WIN DOW& WELLREPLACE EXIS TIN G36" DOOR W/ 72"SLIDERREPLACE EXIS TIN GWI NDOW W/ NEW I NEXIS TIN G OPENI NGDEMO EXIS TI NG FLOWER POTON MAI N F LOORF OUNDATI ON FOR ADDIT ION TOFRONT PORCH NEW FRONT DECKEXI STI NGFOUNDATI ON WALLSFOR WELL ROOMSLIDER SLIDER DRIVE-WAY ADDITION 380 SQFT DECK ADDITION ENTRY REMOVING PAVER BRICKSEXISTING WELL RM N SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 554494 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJ MDJ 6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJ 8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ REMOVING PAVER BRICKS TOTAL OF 210 SQFT. (55 SQFT IS UNDER THE DECK) ADDING 380SQFT ON TO SIDE OF THE DRIVE-WAY. STAYING 3' OFF PROPERTY LINE ENTRY-WAY ADDITION IS 43 SQFT 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJSURVEY W/ PROPOSED PLAN DN BCB24RB18RB3315B33153DB28BCB19R1DB17SB36ChefSeries DishwasherBCB27R B841916SB221832RB391832 BCB24RB18RB3315B33153DB28BCB19R1DB17SB36ChefSeries DishwasherBCB27R B841916SB221832RB391832 U392596W3142W84122 HB BCW1842L BCW3142W2842W1542R 2044SC30682044SC 4016AW18070 51068 10954TC 4344DC 4344DC 41034DC4644DC4236DC4236DC 28682234SC4234DC 4940PT 416824682668 406820681122FX 2422FX26682668 206826685068 2668 5068 6068 11068 UP EXISTING ELECTRICALIN BLUEEXISTING CONNECTIONARE SOLID NEW ELECTRICAL IN REDNEW CONNECTION LINESARE DASHEDELECTRICAL KEYELECTRICAL KEY 12.61'16.74'4'6.4'29.09'10.45'12.35' 225 SQ FT 167 SQ FT 1539 SQ FT 479 SQ FT 139 SQ FT 328 SQ FT 20 SQ FT 13 SQ FT7 SQ FT12 SQ FT 54 SQ FT 152 SQ FT 15 SQ FT15 SQ FT 37 SQ FT 129 SQ FT 20 SQ FT 27 SQ FT 228 SQ FT 186 SQ FT LIVING AREA KITCHEN DINING CLOSETOPEN BELOW JAMB: 5-1/4" BUILT IN SILL GARAGE EXISTING DECK NEW WINDOW IN EXISTING OPENING DEMO WALLS WITH RED HATCHING LIVING BEDROOM2BEDROOM1 MASTER BDRM CLOSET CLOSET CLOSET CLOSET M. BATH BATH CFIRE-PLACEDEMO EXISTING FLOWER POT ON MAIN FLOOR (BRICK FACE) ADDITION TO FRONT PORCH REMOVE EXISTING SERVICE DOOR & GARAGE DOOR FOR A NEW 18' WIDE GARAGE DOOR DECK SHAKES ON ACCENT GABLES 4" CASING ON WINDOWS & DOORS ON FRONT PAINTED BRICK 7" LAP SIDING ACCENT TRIM IN GABLE 6" OUTSIDE CORNERS & 2" INSIDE CORNERS AROUND HOUSE NEW FASCIA & SOFFIT SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 554495 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJ MDJPROPOSED PLANPROPOSED FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" PROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJ 8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ DN HB 2044SC30682044SC 4016AW18070 51068 10954TC 4344DC 4344DC 41034DC4644DC4236DC4236DC 28682234SC4234DC 4940PT 416824682668 406820681122FX 2422FX26682668 206826685068 2668 5068 6068 11068 UP EXISTING ELECTRICALIN BLUEEXISTING CONNECTIONARE SOLID NEW ELECTRICAL IN REDNEW CONNECTION LINESARE DASHEDELECTRICAL KEYELECTRICAL KEY 212 SQ FT 153 SQ FT 457 SQ FT 131 SQ FT 312 SQ FT 19 SQ FT 9 SQ FT5 SQ FT 10 SQ FT 48 SQ FT 139 SQ FT 11 SQ FT12 SQ FT 32 SQ FT 120 SQ FT 16 SQ FT 22 SQ FT 221 SQ FT 184 SQ FT KITCHEN DINING CLOSETOPEN BELOW JAMB: 5-1/4" BUILT IN SILL GARAGE EXISTING DECK NEW WINDOW IN EXISTING OPENING DEMO WALLS WITH RED HATCHING LIVING BEDROOM2BEDROOM1 MASTER BDRM CLOSET CLOSET CLOSET CLOSET M. BATH BATH CFIRE-PLACEDEMO EXISTING FLOWER POT ON MAIN FLOOR (BRICK FACE) ADDITION TO FRONT PORCH REMOVE EXISTING SERVICE DOOR & GARAGE DOOR FOR A NEW 18' WIDE GARAGE DOOR DECK SSS SSSS S SSHB 3540DC 3540DC 9740TC 6068 26682668 2268 2066 2668 3068 3168 306830682243DH 3068 2818AW2840SC2826AW 266820682068UP 292 SQ FT 1484 SQ FT 413 SQ FT 93 SQ FT 50 SQ FT 35 SQ FT 327 SQ FT 34 SQ FT 67 SQ FT 6 SQ FT13 SQ FT19 SQ FT 199 SQ FT 59 SQ FT LIVING AREA WORK-OUT SAUNA HALL LIVING STAIRSFIRE-PLACECLOSETHALL BATHOFFICE CLOSET UTILITY BEDROOM3 EGRESS WINDOW & WELL REPLACE EXISTING 36" DOOR W/ 72" SLIDER REPLACE EXISTING WINDOW W/ NEW IN EXISTING OPENING DEMO EXISTING FLOWER POT ON MAIN FLOOR FOUNDATION FOR ADDITION TO FRONT PORCH NEW FRONT DECK EXISTING FOUNDATION WALLS FOR WELL ROOM SLIDER SLIDER DRIVE-WAY ADDITION380 SQFTDECKADDITIONENTRYREMOVING PAVER BRICKSEXISTINGWELL RMSHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 554496 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJ MDJ PROPOSED MAIN FLOOR - DEMO PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJ PROPOSED BASEMENT - DEMO PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"PROPOSED DEMO PLAN8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ DN 3 3 R4 R4 R4R4 R4 R4 3 3 3 T 3 WP R R LIVING AREA KITCHEN DINING CLOSETOPEN BELOW GARAGE PORCH LIVING FIRE-PLACEBEDROOMBEDROOM CLOSETCLOSET CLOSET MASTER BDRM HALL CLOSET M. BATH BATH C ENTRY CONNECTI ON T OL I GHT POLESSS UP R 33 3 3 WORK-OUTFAMILY SAUNA HALL FAMILY STAIRSFIRE-PLACECLOSETHALL BATHBEDROOM CLOSET UTILITY SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 554497 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJ MDJ ELECTRICAL PLANELEC. PLANS EXISTING & PROPOSEDEXISTING MAIN & BASEMENT ELECTRICAL PLANS SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"EXISTING ELECTRICALELECTRICAL PLANS PROPOSED6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJ 8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ DN UP 3 R4 R4 R4R4 R4 R4 3 WP R R T 3 3 4 RR R R R R R R RR R RR R 4 LIVING AREA KITCHEN DINING CLOSETOPEN BELOW GARAGE LIVING BEDROOM2BEDROOM1 MASTER BDRM CLOSET CLOSET CLOSET CLOSET M. BATH BATH CFIRE-PLACECONNECTI ON TO LIGHTPOLE IN FRONT YARDDECK SSSSSSSS UP R 44 3 3 R R R R RRR 4 WORK-OUT SAUNA HALL LIVING STAIRSFIRE-PLACECLOSETHALL BATHOFFICE CLOSET UTILITY BEDROOM3 DN R EXISTING ELECTRICAL IN BLUE EXISTING CONNECTION ARE SOLID NEW ELECTRICAL IN RED NEW CONNECTION LINES ARE DASHED ELECTRICAL KEYELECTRICAL KEY JAMB: 5-1/4" BUILT IN SILL NEW WINDOW IN EXISTING OPENING DEMO WALLS WITH RED HATCHING DEMO EXISTING FLOWER POT ON MAIN FLOOR (BRICK FACE) ADDITION TO FRONT PORCH REMOVE EXISTING SERVICE DOOR & GARAGE DOOR FOR A NEW 18' WIDE GARAGE DOOR SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 554498 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJ MDJ PROPOSED MAIN & BASEMENT ELECTRICAL PLANS SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"PROPOSED ELECTRICAL6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJ 8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ SHAKES ON ACCENT GABLES 4" CASING ON WINDOWS & DOORS ON FRONT PAINTED BRICK 7" LAP SIDING ACCENT TRIM IN GABLE 6" OUTSIDE CORNERS & 2" INSIDE CORNERS AROUND HOUSE NEW FASCIA & SOFFIT SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 554499 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJ MDJPROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSPROPOSED FRONT EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" PROPOSED LEFT EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" PROPOSED RIGHT EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" PROPOSED BACK EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJ 8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ 3'12'-5 1/4"3'8'-1 1/8"ASPHALT ROOF THAT WOULD BEST MATCH EXISTING FASCIA TO LINE-UP WITH EXISTING FASCIA. VENTED SOFFIT MATERIAL. LAP SIDING VAPOR BARRIER 7/16" OSB SHEATHING 2X6 WALL FOR ADDITION TO ENTRY BATT INSULATED WALLS - (R-21) FINISHED DRYWALL ON INTERIOR FLOOR IN ADDITION 2X10 FLOOR JOIST TO CARRY INTO THE ADDITION @ 16" O.C. INSULATION AT RIM AROUND ADDITION TO R-21 2X6 TREAT SILL 5-COURSE OF 12" CMU 8" X 16" FOOTING EXISTING WELL ROOM & FOUNDATION WALLS GIRDER TRUSS TO SUPPORT EXISTING ROOF FLOOR IN ADDITION 2X10 FLOOR JOIST TO CARRY INTO THE ADDITION @ 16" O.C. 2X6 TREAT SILL 5-COURSE OF 12" CMU 8" X 16" FOOTING GIRDER TRUSS TO SUPPORT EXISTING ROOF FLOOR IN ADDITION 2X10 FLOOR JOIST TO CARRY INTO THE ADDITION @ 16" O.C. EXISTING FOUNDATION WALL FOR WELL ROOM SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 5544910 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJ MDJPROPOSED ADDITION CROSS-SECTIONSPROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" PROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" PROPOSED CROSS- SECTIONS SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJ 8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 5544911 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJ MDJ 6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJPROPOSED CABINET ELEVATIONSENTRY - CABINET ELEVATIONSSCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"KITCHEN - CABINET ELEVATIONSSCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 5544912 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJ MDJ 6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJPROPOSED CABINET ELEVATIONSFULL BATH - ELEVATIONSSCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"M.BATH - ELEVATIONSSCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ SHEET # FILE: SCALE: APPROVED: DRAWN BY: DATE: JOB #: DATE DRAWING BY AS NOTED1613 93rd LANE BLAINE, MN 5544913 -----2460 Kyle Ave. N.Golden Valley, MN 554228455SHULL RESIDENCE9/30/2020 5/19/2020 EXISTING MDJ MDJPROPOSED RENDERINGPROPOSED RENDERING SCALE: UNKNOWN 6/4/2020 CONCEPT PLANS MDJ 6/15/2020 MDJLAYOUT 6/11/2020 ELEC &TERRAIN MDJ 8/20/2020 REVISED PLAN MDJ 9/30/2020 REVISED PLAN W/SURVEY MDJ