pc-agenda-jun-22-20
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 watching on Comcast cable
channel 16, by streaming on CCXmedia.org, or by calling 1‐415‐655‐0001 and entering the meeting
code 133 411 6552.
Additional information about monitoring electronic meetings is available on the City website. For
technical assistance, please contact the City at 763‐593‐8007 or webexsupport@goldenvalleymn.gov.
If you incur costs to call into the meeting, you may submit the costs to the City for reimbursement
consideration.
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of Minutes
June 8, 2020, Regular Planning Commission Meeting
4. Continued Item – Zoning Text Amendments – Proposed Adjustments to Narrow Lot Regulations
– End of Televised Portion of Meeting –
To listen to this portion, please call 1‐415‐655‐0001 and enter meeting access code 133 411 6552
5. Council Liaison Report
6. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning
Appeals, and other meetings
7. Other Business
a. Discussion regarding Board of Zoning Appeals Representation
8. Adjournment
June 22, 2020 – 7 pm
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 Planning Commission 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 meetings by watching it on Comcast cable channel 16, by streaming it on
CCXmedia.org, or by dialing in to the public call‐in line. The public was able to participate in this
meeting during public comment sections, by dialing the public call‐in line.
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 by Chair Blum.
Roll Call
Commissioners present: Rich Baker, Ron Blum, Adam Brookins, Andy Johnson, Lauren Pockl, Ryan
Sadeghi, Chuck Segelbaum,
Commissioners absent: None
Staff present: Jason Zimmerman – Planning Manager, Myles Campbell – Planner
Council Liaison present: Gillian Rosenquist
Prior to starting the meeting, Chair Blum, mentioned the agenda and asked if there would be a
discussion on the Zoning Code Text Amendment or if the group would go right to a motion after the
hearing. Commissioner Baker said he’d like a discussion and noted the agenda didn’t explicitly state a
recommendation was required at the end of this meeting. Commissioner Segelbaum asked staff for
clarification on the need for a recommendation. Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, stated that a
recommendation today is assumed as that’s typical after a hearing. Zimmerman added that after the
hearing, the item may be tabled before the vote and the Commissioners would be able to vote at the
next meeting.
2. Approval of Agenda
Chair Blum asked for a motion to approve the agenda.
MOTION made by Commissioner Baker, seconded by Commissioner Sadeghi to approve the agenda
of June 8, 2020, as submitted. Staff called a roll call vote and the motion carried unanimously.
3. Approval of Minutes
Chair Blum asked for a motion to approve the minutes from May 27, 2020.
MOTION made by Commissioner Pockl, seconded by Commissioner Brookins to approve the May
27, 2020 meeting minutes. Staff called a roll call vote and the motion carried unanimously.
June 8, 2020 – 7 pm
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
June 8, 2020 – 7 pm
2
4. Informal Public Hearing – Zoning Code Text Amendment
Applicant: City of Golden Valley
Purpose: Proposed Adjustments to Narrow Lot Regulations
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, gave a presentation on this item’s history and background
from November 2017 when the initial discussion took place through May 2020 when the Planning
Commission reviewed and discussed the staff’s draft of changes. He reviewed the City Council’s
request, locations where these lots exist, and all the meetings held to address this concern.
Zimmerman displayed the list of nine items for code amendments and staff recommends 1‐8 have
changes and 9 stays as is:
1. Side yard setbacks
2. Garage stall requirements
3. Slope of “tent” portion of building envelope
4. Side wall height at side setback line
5. Second story dormers
6. Side wall articulation
7. Secondary front yard setbacks
8. Lot coverage
9. Amount of impervious surfaces (to stay as is)
Zimmerman expanded on each item throughout the presentation and responded to questions as
Commissioners posed them.
Zimmerman moved on to review the public comments that City staff received regarding the narrow
lot topic. 54 total comments were received via the Golden Valley website or email to Planning staff.
10 of those comments were from folks living on a narrow lot, 8 addresses total as more than one
person at an address made comment. 44 comments were from people not on a narrow lot and the
commenters were mostly from the North Tyrol area. None of the commenter addresses were
immediately adjacent to blocks with narrow lots. Most commenters were within a block or two but
some were over a mile and a half away.
The top 5 comment themes were as follows:
1. Don’t reduce lot sizes or allow more lot splits.
2. Do more to restrict home construction on narrow lots.
3. Do more to protect open/green/landscaped/natural areas.
4. Certain proposed changes are too restrictive or problematic (single car garage provision,
limiting second floor space)
5. Changes seem reasonable and help provide housing diversity.
In addition to these comments, a local designer/builder that has offered perspective before
commented on their concern for reducing building envelope and imposing garage restrictions.
Commissioner Baker chimed in to clarify by saying staff is not proposing tighter garage restrictions
but rather loosening them. Zimmerman responded by saying that staff is no longer requiring two
garage stalls even though most people want them. Limiting a garage façade may lead to a single
stall garage for some lots. Commissioner Segelbaum asked if in general, these new regulations are
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
June 8, 2020 – 7 pm
3
more restrictive for builds than currently exist. Zimmerman responded that’s accurate except for
dormer space, however that’s in response to being more restrictive in other areas.
Chair Blum opened the public hearing at 7:42 pm, there were two callers in the queue at the time
of opening.
Public Comments:
Ruth Paradise, 8515 Duluth Street, said designers may have mentioned a trend of more
bedrooms, but in her neighborhood, there are a few houses with one person living there.
Some have said they wanted a smaller house but couldn’t find one. Ms. Paradise stated this
could be an opportunity for smaller single‐family homes.
Cathy Waldhauser 3220 Orchard Ave N, stated that the Planning Commission compromises
are spot on, they will solve most concerns about homes being too large for narrow lots.
Waldhauser stated that she hopes development can occur in other parts of the city with this
compromise. She’d like to see clusters of smaller homes on smaller lots in the city, she
understands this isn’t the goal now but maybe Golden Valley can head in that direction.
Chair Baker stated he’s becoming convinced that the dormer size/information with only details
from designers and builders isn’t sufficient and would like input from others who are thinking
ahead to the future of construction. Commissioner Segelbaum responded he believes the
Commission has been careful not to weigh too heavily any one opinion, but to look at the
collective.
The conversation moved into lots that are marketable and buildable.
Mary‐Jane Pappas, 20 Ardmore Drive, stated when thinking about the future, we all need
to be more mindful of how much raw material is being used. We also need to be more
economic when considering building a home and leaving green space when possible.
Pappas agrees with two bathrooms and two garage stalls because it creates resale value but
economic value needs to be considered. Many people prefer smaller homes as it cuts down
on costs and maintenance.
Commissioner Brookins stated the group shouldn’t require minimum or max garage size. He would
feel more comfortable not having that requirement at all as he feels that he can’t justify it.
The conversation continued regarding the topics listed by staff, past conversations, public input,
and the idea of considering building for projected demand instead of what’s desirable today. A
number of Commissioners stated they considered public input and were troubled that some
residents didn’t feel their input was actually considered.
Baker requested discussion on dormer dimensions and stated he would not support a
recommendation today. He then suggested the group go through each of the 9 items and asses the
group’s agreement. Segelbaum pointed out that each item is dependent on another so if one
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
June 8, 2020 – 7 pm
4
changes then the others will too. Brookins stated the group should come to a decision otherwise
the conversation may continue for a few more months.
Mary‐Jane Pappas, 20 Ardmore Drive, commented on Baker’s statement about needing a
model to see what the shading is with dormers. She suggested looking at an architect’s
plans and using that as a guide for minimum requirements.
Commissioner Sadeghi stated that he has access to a program that has a sun setting and that
creating a model and utilizing the sun shade setting would be easy.
The Commission moved on with staff to review all the listed items and restate Commissioners
previous opinions on each; discussion followed.
Chair Blum closed the public hearing at 8:44pm
Commissioners entered in to a conversation regarding the garage stall requirements and
transitioned into a conversation about dormers. Baker wanted to know the shadowing effect based
on dormers at different percentages. Commissioner Pockl asked if the regulations presented are
similar to those a previous builder suggested. Staff clarified that the dormer regulations were
stricter than the builder originally stated they’d like to see. These dormer regulations are to
address second floor usability but not to “give back” space and mimic a full second floor. Brookins
stated he likes the dormer percentages even if they seem a bit too strict to him. Based on
questions, staff clarified gable and shed dormers.
The discussion transitioned into specific percentages, measurements, and the desire to see
modeling to understand proximity and shading.
MOTION made by Commissioner Baker and seconded by Commissioner Johnson to table the item
to the June 22, 2020 meeting with staff providing more information on dormers.
Staff took a roll call vote and it passed 5‐2.
Aye: Baker, Blum, Johnson, Pockl, Segelbaum
Nay: Brookins, Sadeghi
Televised portion of the meeting concluded at 9:46 pm
5. Council Liaison Report
Council Member Rosenquist updated the Commission on the City Council meeting where the
Schuller’s rezoning was discussed. The applicant withdrew prior to the staff presentation and will work
to find a compromise solution before the summer of 2021. She also mentioned the recent
Council/Manager meeting and the fact that the City will move forward with hiring an Equity, Inclusion,
and Volunteer Manager. Chair Blum asked a question about composting.
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
June 8, 2020 – 7 pm
5
6. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning
Appeals, and other meetings
Planning Manager Zimmerman confirmed that Commissioner Brookins would be the Planning
Commission representative at the next Board of Zoning Appeals meeting.
7. Other Business
None.
8. Adjournment
MOTION made by Commissioner Pockl, seconded by Commissioner Baker and the motion carried
unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 9:58 PM.
________________________________
Adam Brookins, Secretary
________________________________
Amie Kolesar, Planning Assistant
`
1
Date: June 22, 2020
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
Subject: Continued Item – Zoning Text Amendments – Proposed Adjustments to Narrow
Lot Regulations
Summary
The City Council has directed the Planning Commission to engage in discussion around the zoning
regulations for narrow lots (generally those under 65 feet in width and specifically for those 50
feet or less in width) and to propose any recommended changes to help mitigate impacts on
surrounding properties. At the June 8 Planning Commission meeting, staff presented a series of
recommendations for potential text amendments to the Zoning Chapter of the City Code. At the
conclusion of the public hearing, Commissioners voted to continue the item to the next meeting
in order to provide time for staff to address outstanding questions related to dormers.
Background
Staff has worked with the Planning Commission to identify proposed changes to eight topics
related to the regulation of narrow lots. All of these are found within the Single‐Family
Residential (R‐1) Zoning District (Section 113‐88 of the City Code). Questions regarding one of
these topics, the use of second‐story dormers, were the cause of the continuation to the June 22
meeting. It is anticipated that following the staff presentation and discussion around dormers,
the Commission will resume its consideration of a package of recommended changes that can be
forwarded to the City Council at their July 21 meeting.
The attached underlined/overstruck language for the City Code includes one modification around
garages based on consensus at the previous meeting. Instead of limiting the garage width to 65
percent of the front façade, the amount has been increased to be 75 percent of the front façade.
Many individuals provided electronic comments on the proposed changes and these were
attached to the previous agenda packet. Two additional comments were received after the
agenda packet had been distributed; these comments are also attached.
2
Dormers
In order to help compensate for the loss of this usable second story area, staff recommends
allowing dormers on lots 65 feet wide or less to extend outside of the building envelope. If the
height, width, and location of the dormers are successfully managed, they can be an interesting
architectural feature that creates usable second story floor space while still breaking up the
shading the might otherwise fall on an adjacent property.
The specific regulations around dormers are repeated in the text and images below, but at the
request of the Planning Commission staff has attached a series of key images to help visually
compare the amount of shadowing generated by homes on narrow lots.
Image 1 shows the massing of a building on a 40 foot lot under the current regulations. Images 2
and 3 show buildings that would be allowed using the proposed regulations – the first with a
shed dormer and the second with gable dormers. All three images are shown with shadows
generated by the sun’s position at 1:00 pm on June 20, September 22, and December 21, using
the rough latitude and longitude from the North Tyrol neighborhood and oriented similarly to the
properties on the east side of Meadow Lane North.
All three images use a 5.5 foot setback to the north and an 8 foot setback to the south. The
height of the buildings in Images 2 and 3 tops out at 22 feet. For comparison, the height of the
building in Image 1 is 29 feet at the peak.
As anticipated, modifying the maximum massing of the home on the narrow lot reduces the
impact of shading on the adjacent property in the fall and winter, even with the addition of
second story dormers.
Staff’s original recommendations regarding dormer location, size, and height – which were used
to generate the images – are listed below:
In general – The total dormer length along one side of a home may be broken into more than one
section. No part of a dormer may extend above the ridge line of the roof.
Shed dormers – The total length along one side of a home is limited to 50 percent of the length of
the main wall below. The front wall of the dormer must be set back at least 2 feet from the plane
of the main wall below. The side walls of the dormer must be set back at least 4 feet from the
front or back wall of the home. The maximum height as measured to the top of the front eave
line is limited to 20 feet above average grade.
3
Gable dormers ‐ The total length along one side of a home is limited to 40 percent of the length
of the main wall below. The front wall of the dormer must be set back at least 2 feet from the
plane of the main wall below. The side walls or furthest extent of the dormer must be set back at
least 4 feet from the front or back wall of the home. The maximum height as measured to the top
of the dormer peak is limited to 25 feet above average grade.
4
Comments and Concerns
As of June 19, 55 comments from residents had been submitted through the Narrow Lots web
page. The full text of these comments can be found in the documents attached to the two staff
memos, but in general they can be summarized in four points:
5
1. The proposed regulations don’t go far enough in restricting the scale of new development
and protecting adjacent properties. Numerous residents continue to ask that no
development of narrow lots be allowed at all.
2. Open/green/landscaped/natural areas need to be protected and adding density only
hurts this.
3. Certain proposed regulations might be problematic (allowing homes to be built with just a
single‐car garage was the most common concern).
4. A handful stated the City should be promoting diversity in housing and these proposed
regulations seem reasonable for narrow lots.
Three individuals called‐in to the virtual meeting held on June 8. Two were supportive of the
changes and hoped that homes on smaller lots could provide additional affordable housing in the
city; one expressed concerns that the regulations did not go far enough and supported the
concept of smaller homes on smaller lots.
Impacts of Proposed Regulations
While the true impacts of these proposed changes on the construction of homes on narrow lots
may not fully be known until building plans are submitted, evaluated, and implemented, staff
experiences, discussions among Commissioners, and feedback from other professionals provide a
good basis for anticipating what may result.
Overall, the proposed changes would continue to allow owners of narrow lots to take advantage
of their right to build, while dialing back on the size and scale of what could be constructed in
order to reduce the impacts to adjacent properties.
Summary of Staff Recommendations
Staff is recommending the following modifications to the zoning regulations, as documented in
the attached underlined/overstruck section of code:
1. Establish a minimum side yard setback of 5 feet, regardless of lot width.
2. Allow lots 50 feet in width or less to construct a home with only a one‐car garage. Limit
the garage to a maximum of 65 percent of the front façade.
3. Set the vertical:horizontal ratio of the building envelope at 2:1 instead of 4:1 for all lots.
4. Lower the side wall height from 15 feet to 13 feet at the side yard setback line for lots 75
feet in width or less.
5. For lots 65 feet in width or less, allow second floor dormers to extend outside of the
building envelope but with restrictions on location, size, and height.
6. Prohibit articulation elements from extending into the side yard setback for lots 50 feet
wide or less.
7. Reduce the secondary front yard setback for corner lots 65 feet in width as needed in
order to maintain a 27 foot wide building envelope.
8. Modify the lot coverage maximum for lots under 6,000 square feet to be 30 percent.
Next Steps
6
The proposed zoning text amendments are scheduled to be considered by the City Council on
Tuesday, July 21. The Narrow Lots web page will continue to operate and provide an option for
residents to provide on‐line comments through Wednesday, July 15.
Recommendation
Staff recommends amending the text of the Single‐Family Residential (R‐1) Zoning District as
detailed in the attached document.
Attachments
Dormer Shading Studies (3 pages)
Narrow Lots Info Session Feedback (1 page)
Underline/Overstruck Language for Sec. 113‐88: Single‐Family Residential (R‐1) Zoning District (10
pages)
Image 1A – Existing Conditions, Summer
Image 1B – Existing Conditions, Fall
Image 1C – Existing Conditions, Winter
Image 2A – Shed Dormer, Summer
Image 2B – Shed Dormer, Fall
Image 2C – Shed Dormer, Winter
Image 3A – Gable Dormers, Summer
Image 3B – Gable Dormers, Fall
Image 3C – Gable Dormers, Winter
Information Session Feedback 1
Info Session Feedback
Name Address Comment
Peter
Knaeble
6001 Glenwood
Ave
Golden Valley,
MN. 55422
Hi Jason,
Please forward these comments to the Planning Comm.
Thanks
Planning Commission members:
In regards to the proposed narrow lot standards I have the following comments:
* I think that it is a mistake to limit any new home design to a single car ga-
rage. Any new home should be allowed a two car garage that faces the street.
No builder or home owner would build a $500K+ new home with a single car
garage (or a tandem garage).
*. I would recommend that any new narrow lot standards only be adopted if the
City can prove that a reasonable home (3 br, 3 ba, 2 car garage, 2 story, 2400 sf)
can be built. The City needs to hire a home designer or builder to prepare some
typical home designs that will meet any new home standards that are proposed.
If a reasonable home cannot be designed, the new standards are too strict.
Thank you
M Peters 4810 Lowry
Terrace N
GOLDEN
VALLEY, MN
55422
United States
1. Will GV allow narrow lots in established neighborhoods with standard 80’
lot widths? There is a concern that this will negatively impact established neigh-
borhoods. 2. Changing a 2 car garage requirement to a 1 stall garage will put
more parked cars in the driveway and on our streets. 3. How will storm water be
addressed - can retaining walls be within the ‘setbacks’? 4. Firepits - our neigh-
borhood is saturated with firepits that require us to go inside/close our windows
on a nightly basis - how will this be managed?
Thank you in advance for your response
Staff Response:
Hello,
1. No changes to the current regulations, which require 80’ lots, are being
considered. Only older platted lots that pre-date current regulations are being
addressed. These are in a handful of concentrated locations across the city.
2. Noted.
3. Stormwater is managed through a stormwater permit when building
plans are submitted. Retaining walls (with certain limitations on height) may be
located within setbacks.
4. Backyard fires are permitted through our Fire Department. There is a
web page with more information (http://www.goldenvalleymn.gov/fire/permits/
recreational-fires.php) or you should contact the Fire Department directly at
763-593-8055.
Sec. 113-88. - Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District.
(a) Purpose. The purpose of the Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District is to provide for
detached single-family dwelling units at a low density along with directly related and
complementary uses.
(b) District Established. Lots shall be established within the R-1 Zoning District in the manner
provided for in Section 113-29. The district established and/or any subsequent changes to such
district shall be reflected in the Official Zoning Map of the City as provided in Section 113-56.
(c) Principal Uses. The following principal uses shall be permitted in the R-1 Zoning District:
(1) Single-family dwellings, consistent with the City's Mixed-Income Housing Policy
(2) Residential facilities serving six or fewer persons
(3) Foster family homes; and
(4) Essential services, Class I.
(d) Accessory Uses. The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the R-1 Zoning District:
(1) When the property owner resides in the dwelling, rental of single sleeping rooms to
not more than two people for lodging purposes only; and
(2) In-home child care licensed by the State.
(3) Home occupations, as governed by the following requirements:
a. The use of the dwelling for the occupation or profession shall be incidental and
secondary to the use of the dwelling for residential purposes.
b. The exterior appearance of the structure shall not be altered for the operation
of the home occupation.
c. There shall be no outside storage or display of signage or anything related to or
indicative of the home occupation.
d. An accessory structure, including a garage, shall not be used for a home
occupation.
e. A permitted home occupation shall not result in noise, fumes, traffic, lights,
odor, excessive sewage or water use or garbage service, electrical, radio, or TV
interference in a manner detrimental to the health, safety, enjoyment, and general
welfare of the surrounding residential neighborhood.
f. No physical products shall be displayed or sold on the premises those incidental
to the permitted home occupation.
g. No signs or symbols shall be displayed other than those permitted for
residential purposes.
h. Clients, deliveries, and other business activity where persons come to the
home shall be limited to the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.
i. No more than 20 percent of the gross floor area of the dwelling shall be used for
the home occupation.
j. Parking related to the home occupation shall be provided only on the driveway
of the property where the home occupation operates.
k. A home occupation shall not generate more than eight client trips per day and
serve no more than two clients or customers at a time.
l. There shall only be one outside employee allowed on the premises at which a
home occupation is located.
m. All other applicable City, State, and Federal licenses, codes and regulations
shall be met.
n. The following uses are prohibited home occupations:
1. Repair, service, building, rebuilding or painting of autos, trucks, boats,
and other vehicles
2. Repair and service of items that cannot be carried by one person and
repair and service of any item involving an internal combustion engine or
motor
3. Retail sales
4. Medical/dental clinic or similar
5. Restaurants or cafes
6. Animal hospital
7. Veterinary clinic
8. Stable or kennel
9. Funeral home, mortuary, or columbarium; and
10. Sale or repair of firearms.
(e) Conditional Uses. The following conditional uses may be allowed after review by the Planning
Commission and approval by the City Council in accordance with the standards and procedures
set forth in this chapter:
(1) Residential facilities serving from seven to 25 persons; and
(2) Group foster family homes.
(f) Principal Structures. Principal structures in the R-1 Zoning District shall be governed by the
following requirements:
(1) Setback Requirements. The following setbacks shall be required for principal
structures in the R-1 Zoning District. Garages or other accessory structures which are
attached to the dwelling or main structure shall also be governed by these setback
requirements, except for stairs and stair landings of up to 25 square feet in size and for
accessible ramps.
a. Front Setback. 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 of a front lot line along a street right-of-
way line. This requirement shall not reduce the building envelope on any corner
lot to less than 27 feet in width.
b. Rear Setback. The required rear setback shall be 25 feet.
c. Side Setbacks. Side yard setbacks are determined by the lot width at the
minimum required front setback line. The distance between a structure and the
side lot lines shall be governed by the following requirements:
1. In the case of lots having a width of 100 feet or greater, the side
setbacks for any portion of a structure 15 feet or less in height shall be 15
feet. The side setbacks for any portion of a structure greater than 15 feet
in height shall be measured to an inwardly sloping plane at a ratio of 2:1
beginning at a point 15 feet directly above the side setback line (see figure
below).
2. In the case of lots having a width greater than 65 feet and less than 100
feet, the side setbacks for any portion of a structure 15 feet or less in
height shall be 12.5 feet. The side setbacks for any portion of a structure
greater than 15 feet in height shall be measured to an inwardly sloping
plane at a ratio of 2:1 beginning at a point 15 feet directly above the side
setback line (see figure below).
3. In the case of lots having a width of 65 feet or less, the side setbacks
for any portion of a structure 1513 feet or less in height along the north or
west side shall be 10 percent of the lot width and along the south or east
side shall be 20 percent of the lot width (up to 12.5 feet). In no case shall
a side setback be less than 5 feet. The side setback for any portion of a
structure greater than 1513 feet in height measured to an inwardly sloping
plane at a ratio of 42:1 beginning at a point 1513 feet directly above the
side setback line (see figure below).
d. Corner Lot Setbacks. To determine the side yard setback, use the shorter front
lot line.
e. Building Envelope. Taken together, the front, rear, and side setbacks and the
height limitation shall constitute the building envelope (see figures below). No
portion of a structure may extend outside the building envelope, except for:
1. Cornices and eaves, no more than 30 inches
2. For lots greater than 50 feet in width, Bbay windows or chimney chases,
no more than 24 inches but no closer than 5 feet from the side property
line
3. Chimneys, vents, or antennas
4. Stairs and stair landings up to 25 square feet in size; or
5. Accessible ramps.; or
6. For lots 65 feet in width or less, dormers, subject to the following
requirements:
a. In general. The total dormer length along one side of a structure
may be broken into more than one section. No portion of any
dormer shall extend above the ridge line of the roof.
b. Shed dormer. A dormer with a flat eave line that runs parallel to
the primary roof line.
i. The total length of all shed dormers along one side of a
structure is limited to 50 percent of the length of the main
wall below.
ii. The front wall of a shed dormer shall be set back a
minimum of two feet from the plane of the main wall below.
iii. The side walls of a shed dormer shall be set back a
minimum of four feet from the plane of the main wall below
on each end of the structure.
iv. The maximum height of a shed dormer shall be 20 feet
as measured from the average grade to the front eave line
of the dormer.
c. Gable dormer. A dormer with a peaked roof.
i. The total length of all gable dormers along one side of a
structure is limited to 40 percent of the length of the main
wall below.
ii. The front wall of a gable dormer shall be set back a
minimum of two feet from the plane of the main wall below.
iii. The side walls or furthest extent of a gable dormer shall
be set back a minimum of four feet from the plane of the
main wall below on each end of the structure.
iv. The maximum height of a gable dormer shall be 25 feet
as measured from the average grade to the dormer peak.
(2) Height Restrictions. No principal structure shall be erected in the R-1 Zoning District
with a building height exceeding 28 feet as measured from the average grade at the front
building line. The average grade for a new structure shall be no more than one foot higher
than the average grade that previously existed on the lot.
(3) Structure Width Requirement. No principal structure shall be less than 22 feet in width
as measured from the exterior of the exterior walls.
(4) Side Wall Articulation. For any new construction, whether a new dwelling, addition, or
replacement through a tear-down, any resulting side wall longer than 32 feet in length
must be articulated, with a shift of at least two feet in depth, for at least eight feet in
length, for every 32 feet of wall.
(5) Decks. Decks over eight inches from ground level shall meet the same setbacks as
the principal structure in the side and rear yards.
(6) Kitchens. No more than one kitchen and one kitchenette shall be permitted in each
dwelling unit.
(7) Manufactured Homes. All manufactured or modular homes must meet the provisions
of the zoning and building codes.
(g) Accessory Structures. Accessory structures in the R-1 Zoning District shall be governed by
the following requirements:
(1) Location and Setback Requirements. The following location regulations and setbacks
shall be required for accessory structures in the R-1 Zoning District:
a. Location. A detached accessory structure shall be located completely to the
rear of the principal structure, unless it is built with frost footings. In that case, an
accessory structure may be built no closer to the front setback than the principal
structure.
b. Front Setback. Accessory structures shall be located no less than 35 feet from
the front lot line.
c. Side and Rear Setbacks. Accessory structures shall be located no less than
five feet from a side or rear lot line.
d. Cornices and Eaves. Cornices and eaves may not project more than 30 inches
into a required setback.
e. Separation Between Structures. Accessory structures shall be located no less
than 10 feet from any principal structure and from any other accessory structure.
f. Alleys. Accessory structures shall be located no less than five feet from an alley.
g. Fences. For the purposes of setbacks, fences are not considered structures.
(2) Height Restrictions. No accessory structure shall be erected in the R-1 Zoning District
with a height in excess of one story, which is 10 feet from the floor to the top horizontal
component of a frame building to which the rafters are fastened (known as the "top
plate"). For the purposes of this regulation, the height of a shed roof shall be measured to
the top plate.
(3) Area Limitations. Each lot is limited to a total of 1,000 square feet of the following
accessory structures: detached and attached garages, detached sheds, greenhouses,
and gazebos. Swimming pools are not included in this requirement. No one detached
accessory structure may be larger than 800 square feet in area and any accessory
structure over 200 square feet in area requires a building permit. No accessory structure
shall occupy a footprint larger than that of the principal structure.
(4) Zoning Permits. The following shall require a zoning permit to ensure a conforming
location on the lot:
a. Fences
b. Patios
c. Any accessory structures less than 200 square feet in area; and
d. Decks and platforms that do not require a building permit.
(5) Garage Provisions. Garages in the R-1 Zoning District shall be governed by the
following requirements:
a. Minimum Garage Stalls. For lots greater than 50 feet wide, Nno building permit
shall be issued for a single-family dwelling not having a two-stall garage unless
the registered survey submitted at the time of the application for the building
permit reflects the necessary area and setback requirements for a future two-stall
(minimum) garage. Lots 50 feet in width or less may be constructed with one
garage stall.
b. Maximum Garage Width. For lots 50 feet in width or less, the width of the front
wall of an attached garage shall not exceed 75 percent of the width of the
dwelling's front facade. For purposes of this subsection, a dwelling's front facade
means that portion of the dwelling's building facing a front lot line that includes
any front wall of a garage and provides vehicular access to the garage.
1. Measurement of Front Facade. The width of the front facade shall be
the direct, linear, horizontal distance between the dwelling's exterior side
walls at the front facade's widest point.
2. Measurement of Front Garage Wall. For purposes of this subsection,
the front wall of a garage shall be the wall of the garage facing the front lot
line, including any door providing vehicular access to the garage. The
width of the front wall shall be the direct, linear, horizontal distance
between the exterior or outermost location of the garage's two side walls
at their intersection with the garage's front wall.
(6) Roof Style. Gambrel and mansard roofs are not permitted on any accessory structure
with a footprint of more than 200 square feet.
(7) Decks. Freestanding decks or decks attached to accessory structures shall meet the
same setback requirements for accessory structures.
(8) Garden Structures. Garden structures shall be located no closer than five feet to any
lot line. Garden structures shall not exceed 10 feet in height.
(9) Play Structures. Play structures shall be located no closer than five feet to any lot line.
Play structures shall not exceed 10 feet in height.
(10) Swimming Pools. Swimming pools shall meet the same setback and location
requirements for accessory structures. Setbacks shall be measured from the lot line to
the pool's edge. Decks surrounding above-ground pools shall meet setback requirements.
(11) Photovoltaic Modules. Freestanding photovoltaic modules, including solar panels
and other photovoltaic energy receivers, which are in excess of three square feet shall
meet the same setback, location, and height requirements for accessory structures.
(12) Central Air Conditioning Units. Central air conditioning units shall be prohibited in a
front yard.
(h) Temporary Storage Units. Temporary storage units in the R-1 Zoning District shall be
governed by the following requirements:
(1) Duration. Temporary storage units shall not be stored on a lot for more than 14 days.
(2) Location. Temporary storage units shall be stored on a hard surface and be located
completely on private property.
(i) Pre-1982 Structures. For all existing structures constructed in the R-1 Zoning District prior to
January 1, 1982, the following structure setbacks shall be in effect:
(1) Front Yard. The structure setback for principal structures shall be no closer than 25
feet to the front lot line.
(2) Side Yard. The structure setback for principal structures shall be no closer than three
feet to the side lot line.
(3) Rear Yard. The structure setback for principal structures shall be no closer than 10
feet to the rear lot line.
(4) Accessory structures. The structure setback for accessory structures shall be no
closer than three feet to the side or rear Lot lines. At the discretion of the City Manager or
his/her designee, a property owner may be required to move an accessory structure if it is
located in a public easement area.
(j) Pre-April 15, 2015, Structures, Building Permits and Applications. For all structures
constructed and building permits issued or applied therefor in the R-1 Zoning District prior to April
15, 2015, if the height and side setbacks were deemed by the City to be compliant with the
zoning code at the time a building permit was issued or applied therefor, the height and location
shall be deemed conforming to current zoning code. However, in all cases, new construction and
additions to such properties must comply with current requirements of the zoning code.
(k) Buildable Lots. No dwelling or accessory structure shall be erected for use or occupancy as a
residential dwelling on any tract of unplatted land which does not conform with the requirements
of this section, except on those lots located within an approved plat. In the R-1 Zoning District a
platted lot of a minimum area of 10,000 square feet and a minimum width of 80 feet at the front
setback line shall be required for one single-family dwelling.
(l) Lot Coverage. No lot or parcel in the R-1 Zoning District shall have lot coverage of more than
30 percent for a lot or parcel over 10,000 square feet or greater in area, 35 percent for a lot or
parcel betweengreater than 56,000 square feet and less than 9,99910,000 square feet in area
and 430 percent for a lot or parcel less than 56,000 square feet or less in area. This requirement
excludes swimming pools.
(m) Impervious Surfaces. The total amount of impervious surfaces on any lot shall not exceed 50
percent of the area.
(n) Paved Areas. Paved areas in the R-1 Zoning District, including those constructed of concrete,
bituminous pavement, or pavers, are governed by the following provisions:
(1) Driveways. Driveways built or reconstructed on or after January 1, 2005, shall be
paved.
(2) Setbacks. Paved areas shall be set back three feet from a lot line, except for shared
driveways used by multiple property owners pursuant to a private easement.
(3) Coverage. No more than 40 percent of the front yard may be covered with concrete,
bituminous pavement, or pavers.
(4) Street Access. Each lot may have only one street curb cut access, except the
following lots may have up to two street curb cut accesses:
a. A lot that contains two legally constructed garages.
b. A lot of a resident who requires additional driveway access qualifying for a
reduced class rate for homestead property as defined by Minn. Stats. § 273.13,
subd. 22, Class 1b.