HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-06-12 Planning Commission Meeting PacketsAGENDA
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
JUNE 12, 2013
7:00 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
A. Minutes of the regular meeting of the Edina Planning Commission May 8, 2013 and May 22, 2013.
V. COMMUNITY COMMENT
During "Community Comment," the Planning Commission will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that
haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Commission or which aren't slated for future consideration.
Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same
issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on this morning's agenda may
not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Commission Members to
respond to their comments today. Instead, the Commission might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a
future meeting.
VI. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Zoning Ordinance Update — Residential Development
VIII CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
• Council Connection
• Attendance
IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS
X. STAFF COMMENTS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the
way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952-927-886172
hours in advance of the meeting. Next Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission Wednesday June 26.2013
M—EMO
A,
City Hall + Phone 952-927-8862
O Q''`
Fax 952-826-0389 • www.Ckyorcfta.com p
Date: June 12, 2013
To: Planning Commission
From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director
Re: Zoning Ordinance Amendment Consideration -- Residential Redevelopment (issues
Identified)
The following issues or topics have been considered by the Planning Commission over the
past several months in regard to addressing the issue of "residential redevelopment" of
single and two-family homes in Edina:
I . Drainage, retaining walls, egress window and site access.
2. Building Lot Coverage.
3. Side yard setback including second story setback requirement.
4. Building Height
S. Side wall articulation.
6. Front facing garage.
7. Nonconforming front yard setbacks.
8. Garage stall requirements
9. Miscellaneous Code Revision "clean up."
The Planning Commission has had some differing opinions and recommendations on each
Issue as they have been discussed. The Commission is asked to hold a public hearing to
gain additional input, and again consider each of these issues. Based on the discussion of
the issues, the Input gathered from the public hearing, the Planning Commission is also
asked to give staff direction Into drafting an Ordinance Amendment to regulate the issues.
The Ordinance would then be brought back to the Planning Commission on June 26 with
the goal of the Planning Commission recommending an Ordinance amendment to be
Considered by the City Council on July 16.
A summary of the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments, as they have been drafted to
date, regarding each of these issues is as follows:
1. Drainane retaining walls egress window and site a (Page 2 and 6 of the draft
Ordinance.)The Ordinance makes the drainage regulations clear; prohibits
redirection of water to adjacent properties, requires a building permit and a three
foot setback for retaining walls taller than four feet; requires a three foot access
from a front yard to a rear yard; and
City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424
MEMO
a r<,r
Egress windows wells now require a 5 -foot setback.
• <a Vim,,
2. Building Lot Coverage. (Page 6.) Building Coverage was originally recommended to
be revised to be uniform throughout the City at 25%. That would have been a
change for lots less than 9,000 square feet in size, as they are now allowed 30% lot
coverage. At the April 24 meeting, Planning Commission recommended that no
changes be made In regard to building lot coverage. Building Coverage
requirements have been moved to one place within the Ordinance, to make it
easier to understand.
3. Side yard setback including second start' setback requirement. (Pages 4-6 and 9.)
Side yard setback requirements have been Increased a maximum of 2 feet for lots
less than 75 feet in width. (See examples on pages Alb -Ale.) Requirements have
been revised as fellows:
Lots 49 feet wide or less = 5 feet on each side
Lots 50-59 feet wide = 12 feet total, with no less than 5 feet on one side.
Lots 60-74 feet wide = Increase the required setback 4 inches on each side for
each foot the lot exceeds 60 feet.
Lots 75 feet wide and above = No change; 10 feet on each side.
The second story setback increase based on height has been eliminated. (Pages 7-
8.)
4. Building Height. (Page I and 6.) Maximum height to the ridge line for lots less than
75 feet in width has been reduced from 35 to 30 feet. Lots over 75 feet in width
remain 35-40 feet. (See attached examples on page A I and A I a for what the height
regulation might look like.) Eliminated the measurement for building height to the
mid -point of a single and two family dwelling units. Regulations for commercial,
industrial and high density residential development do not change.
5. Sidewall Articulation. (Page 1 l .) The following language is suggested, based on the
City of Alamo Heights regulation: 1. Sidewall Articulation for Principal Structure.
In order to avoid the monotonous appearance of long, unbroken building facades
from abutting properties, the length of an exterior side wall shall not exceed thirty
(30) feet without a) a minimum of at least a one (1) foot by ten (10) foot offset
(projection or rescission) or b) a combination of two (2) of the following
architectural or utilitarian features every thirty (30) feet:
a) Structural window awnings or canopies
b) Projecting bay or box windows, cantilevered, rather than supported by a
permanent foundation
C) Stoops
d) Porches
e) Chimneys (minimum depth of one (1) foot)
City of Edina - 4801 W. 501 St. • Edina, MN 55424
MEMO
A.
o e �..
Balconies •,�
g) Roof dormers
h) Pilasters
1) Second story roof overhang (at least twenty percent (20%) of the fa;ade
length)
J) Port-cocheres (a roofed structure extending from the building over an
adjacent driveway that vehicles drive through, typically sheltering those
getting out of vehicles or as a passageway to a garage)
Attached are examples of "articulation" requirements from the City of Alamo
Heights, and Los Angeles. (See pages A7—Al2.)
b. Front Facing Garage. (Page 11.) A front facing garage on lots less than 75 feet in
width. Garage doors that face a public street shall be no more than nine (9) feet in
height and twenty-four (24) feet in width and shall not exceed 60% of the width of
the principal structure. (See attached examples on pages A2—A6d.)
Attached are examples of this regulation from Lacy Washington, Plainfield Indiana,
Portland Oregon, Minneapolis and St. Paul. (See pages A2 A6.)
7. Nonconforming Front yard setback.. (Page 7.) For a lot with an existing dwelling unit with
a nonconforming front street setback, the existing nonconforming front street setback
may be maintained for an addition or a tear down and rebuild of a new home, as long as
the new construction is not closer to the front lot line than the existing nonconforming
structure and shall not be closer than 30 feet to the front lot line.
8. .egg Stall Requirement. (Page 2.) Lots over 75 feet in width are required to have
at least a two -stall garage, as required under the existing Zoning Ordinance. Lots
75 feet in width or less must have at least a one -stall garage.
Accessory Buildings and Structures Used for Dwelling Purposes. (Pages 8-
9.)
9.) This provision is stricken, as the City Code does not allow accessory
building to be used for dwelling purposes in the R I District.
Variance and CUP process Floodplain. (Pages 12-17.) The City Attorney
has recommended this change. It simply eliminates the flood plain variance
and conditional use permit process. These provisions are already covered in
the Zoning Ordinance. There is no need for this Section. It was copied from
the template provided for cities that were to adopt flood plain regulations.
Current variance and CUP process would apply.
City of Edina • 4801 W. S" Sc • Edina, MN 55424
Draft 6-12-2013
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-_
AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING THE R-1, SINGLE -
DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR
BUILDING COVERAGE, SETBACK AND HEIGHT
The City Council Of Edina Ordains:
Section 1. Subsection 850.03. Subd. 3. Definitions is hereby amended as
follows:
Building Height or Structure Height. (Commercial, Industrial and High
Density Resident al)The distance measured from the average existing
ground elevation adjoining the building at the front building line to the top of
the cornice of a flat roof, to the deck line of a mansard roof, to a point on the
roof directly above the highest wall of a shed roof, to the uppermost point on
a round or other arch type roof, or to the average distance of the highest
gable on a pitched or hip roof. References in this Section to building height
shall include and mean structure height, and if the structure is other than a
building, the height shall be measured from said average existing ground
elevation to the highest point of the structure. "Existing ground elevation"
means the lowest of the following elevations: (1) the grade approved at the
time of the subdivision creating the lot, (2) the grade at the time the last
demolition permit was issued for a principal structure that was on the lot, (3)
the grade at the time the building permit for a principal structure on the tot is
applied for.
Existing text— XXXX
Stricken text — XXXX
Added text —
Section 2. Subsection 850.07. Subd. 7. is hereby amended as follows:
Subd.7. Drainage'i'Rofa in WiO &►
Surface water runoff shall be properly channeled into storm
sewers, watercourses, ponding areas or other public facilities. All
provisions for drainage, including storm sewers, sheet drainage
and swales, shall be reviewed and approved by the engineer
prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure the provisions of
this Section are met.
Section 3. Subsection 850.08. Subd. 1 is hereby amended as follows:
Subd. 1 Minimum Number of Spaces Required.
A. Single Dwelling Units, Double Dwelling Units and Residential
Townhouses. Two fully enclosed spaces per dwelling unit
Of # O liag uoltr toy " d i's ft'to4 s,
Section 4. Subsection 850.11. Subd. 6. is hereby amended as follows:
Subd. 6 Requirements for Building Coverage, Setbacks and Height.
Existing text— XXXX 2
Stricken text—XXX
Added text — .
A. Building Coverage.
1. Lots 9,000 Square Feet or Greater in Area. Building coverage
shall be not more than 25 percent for all buildings and
structures. On lots with an existing conditional use, If the
combined total area occupied by all accessory buildings and
structures, excluding attached garages, is 1,000 square feet or
greater, a conditional use permit is required.
2. Lots Less Than 9,000 Square Feet in Area. Building coverage
shall be not more than 30 percent for all buildings and
structures, provided, however, that the area occupied by all
buildings and structures shall not exceed 2,250 square feet.
2.3-. The combined total area occupied by all accessory buildings
and structures, excluding attached garages, shall not exceed
1,000 square feet for lots used for single dwelling unit
buildings.
W
Existing text — XXXX 3
Stricken text — XXM
Added text
AWQi-91 Ell
B. Minimum Setbacks (subject to the requirements of paragraph A. of Subd. 7
of this Subsection 850.11).
Front Street Side InteriorSide Rear
Street Yard Yard
1. Single dwelling 30'** 15' 10' 25'
unit buildings on
Lots 75 feet or
more in width.
2. Single dwelling 30'**
unit buildings on
lots more than 60
feet in width, but
less than 75 feet
in width.
15' The —required 25'
iRtefieF--YEW
setbask—o€--6
feet -6
insFease-by l�
feet- (4--inehes)
fer- eaGh feet
that the 40
width—emeeeds
60 feet.
Existing text —XXXX 4
Stricken text —F
Added text —v O
3. Single dwelling 30'**
unit buildings on
10
$ men
ON 60 feet eF
less in width.
15' S'— '1" 25'
't.a' V
5. Buildings and structures accessory to single dwelling unit buildings:
a. detached -- 15' 3' 3'
garages, tool
sheds,
greenhouses and
garden houses
entirely within the
rear yard, including
the eaves.
b. attached
garages, tool 30' 15' 5' 25'
sheds,
greenhouses and
garden houses.
c. detached
garages, tool -- 15' 5" 5'
sheds,
greenhouses and
garden houses not
entirely within the
rear yard.
d. unenclosed
decks and patios. 30' 15' 5' 5'
e. swimming pools,
including
Existing text — XXXX 5
Stricken text - XYM
Added text — � .
appurtenant 30' 15' 10' 10'
equipment and
required decking.
f. tennis courts,
basketball courts, 30' 15' 5' 5'
sports courts,
hockey and skating
rinks, and other
similar recreational
accessory uses
Including
appurtenant
fencing and
lighting.
g. all other 30' 15'
5' 5'
accessory buildings
and structures.
K SWOW VA"`
C. Height
1. Single dwelling units buildings and
2'r4 stories. OF 30 $Set
structures accessory thereto.
VAislaever-isaess it
2. Buildings and structures accessory to
1 "/ stories or 18 feet
single dwelling unit buildings, but not
whichever is less
attached thereto.
3. All other buildings and structures
3 stories or 40 feet
whichever is less
4. The maximum height to the highest point on a roof of a single or
double dwelling unit shall be 36 90 feet. ft.. r"Ut bt�'
x
Vo%
the
maximum height may be increased by one inch for each foot that the lot
exceeds 75 feet in width. In no event shall the maximum height exceed
40 feet.
Existing text— XXXX 6
Stricken text —X
Added text—
Section 5. Subsection 850.11. Subd. 7.A. is hereby amended as follows
Subd. 7 Special Requirements. In addition to the general requirements
described in Subsection 850.07, the following special requirements shall apply.
A. Special Setback Requirements for Single Dwelling Unit Lots.
1. Established Front Street Setback. When more than 25 percent of
the lots on one side of a street between street intersections, on
one side of a street that ends in a cul-de-sac, or on one side of a
dead end street, are occupied by dwelling units, the front street
setback for any lot shall be determined as follows:
a. If there is an existing dwelling unit on an abutting lot on
only one side of the lot, the front street setback
requirement shall be the same as the front street
setback of the dwelling unit on the abutting lot,
b. If there are existing dwelling units on abutting lots on
both sides of the lot, the front street setback shall be
the average of the front street setbacks of the dwelling
units on the two abutting lots.
c. In all other cases, the front street setback shall be the
average front street setback of all dwelling units on the
same side of that street.
rM
2. Side Street Setback. The required side street setback shall be
increased to that required for a front street setback where there is
an adjoining interior lot facing on the same street. The required
side street setback for a garage shall be increased to 20 feet if the
garage opening faces the side street.
Existing text — XXXX 7
Stricken text —XXXX
Added text —
feet.shall be inGFeased by 6 *RGh8G W 88Gh feet the building height
exGeeds 16
buildiiig
r -OF PUFPases of,
height shall be the height of that side ef the building adjOiRiAg the
side lot line and shall be measuFed f0em the aveFage pmpesed
above the highest wall ef a shed Foef, to the uppeFmest point on a
f :
:4 -Rear Yard Setback - Interior Lots. If the rear lot line is less than 30
feet in length or if the lot forms a point at the rear and there is no
rear lot line, then for setback purposes the rear lot line shall be
deemed to be a straight line segment within the lot not less than
30 feet in length, perpendicular to a line drawn from the midpoint
of the front lot line to the junction of the interior lot lines, and at the
maximum distance from the front lot line.
4. Rear Yard Setback - Corner Lots Required to Maintain Two Front
Street Setbacks. The owner of a corner lot required to maintain
two front street setbacks may designate any interior lot line
measuring 30 feet or more in length as the rear lot line for setback
purposes. In the alternative, the owner of a corner lot required to
maintain two front street setbacks may deem the rear lot line to be
a straight line segment within the lot not less than 30 feet in length,
perpendicular to a line drawn from the junction of the street
frontages to the junction of the interior lot lines, the line segment
being the maximum distance from the junction of the street
frontages.
5. Through Lots. For a through lot, the required setback for all
buildings and structures from the street upon which the single
dwelling unit building does not front shall be not less than 25 feet.
an aGeesseFy building OF StFUrAuFe ,
without limitafien-,
Existing text — XXXX 8
Stricken text—VW
Added text—Xt
gaFages), is used OF intended
feF use, in whole
OF in PaFt, fQ
residential eaeupanGy, then
suoh areessefy building
OF StMetum e
euGh addition OF eXpaMiGA,
setbar.k FequiFements f9F
shall Gemply with all of
a single dwelling unit building,
the Fninimum
6. Interior Side Yard Setbacks for lots 60-74 feet in width shall be as
follows:
Lot Width
Required Interior
Side Yard Setback
74
20' with no less than 10 feet on one side
73
20' with no less than 10 feet on one side
72
20' with no less than 10 feet on one side
71
19'4" with no less than 9 feet on one side
70
18'8" with no less than 9 feet on one side
69
18' with no less than 9 feet on one side
68
17'4" with no less than 8 feet on one eide
67
16'8" with no less than 8 feet on one side
66
16' with no less than 8 feet on one side
65
15'4" with no less than 7 feet on, one side
64
14'8" with no less than 7 feet on one side
63
14' with no less than 7 feet on one side
62
13'4" with no less than 6 feet on one side
61
12' 8 " total, with no less than 6 feet on one side
B. One Dwelling Unit Per Single Dwelling Unit Lot. No more than one
dwelling unit shall be erected, placed or used on any lot unless the lot is
subdivided into two or more lots pursuant to Section 810 of this Code.
Existing text — XXXX 9
Stricken text — XXXX
Added text — M"
C. Basements. All single dwelling unit buildings shall be constructed with
a basement having a gross floor area equal to at least 50 percent of
the gross floor area of the story next above. The floor area of
accessory uses shall not be included for purposes of this paragraph.
D. Minimum Building Width. No more than 30 percent of the length, in
the aggregate, of a single dwelling unit building shall measure less
than 18 feet in width as measured from the exterior of the exterior
walls.
E. Parking Ramps Prohibited. No parking ramp shall be constructed in
the R 1 District.
F. Temporary retail sales of evergreen products from Conditional Use
properties
1. The Manager may grant a permit for temporary retail sales of
evergreen products, if.
a. the owner of the property or other non-profit group
approved by the owner conducts the sale.
b, the duration of the sale does not exceed 45 consecutive
days and does not start before November 15 in any year.
c. the sale area is located in a suitable off-street location that
does not interfere with traffic circulation on the site or
obstruct parking spaces needed by the principal use on
the site.
d. the sale area is not located within 200 feet of a property
zoned and used for residential occupancy.
e. the hours of operation do not extend beyond 10:00 p..m.,
f. signage is limited to one sign per street frontage with an
aggregate sign area not exceeding 100 square feet.
G. Additions to or replacement of, single dwelling unit buildings and
buildings containing two dwelling units. For additions, alterations and
changes to, or rebuilds of existing single dwelling unit buildings and
buildings containing two dwellings, the first floor elevation may not be
Existing text -, XXXX 10
Stricken text —XXM
Added text—
more than one foot above the existing first floor elevation. if a split
level dwelling is torn down and a new home is built, the new first floor
or entry level elevation may not be more than one foot above the front
entry elevation of the home that was torn down. Subject to Section
850.11 Subd. 2. I. the first floor elevation may be increased more than
one (1) foot. The provisions of this paragraph shall apply to all single
dwelling unit buildings and buildings containing two dwelling units
including units in the flood plain overlay district. Any deviation from the
requirements of this paragraph shall require a variance.
Section 6. Subsection 850.21 Subd. 11.C. is hereby amended as follows;
Existing text — XXXX l l
Stricken text —XXM
Added text —)OM
Existing text — XXXX
Stricken text
Added text —
and may exeraise all of the pmem oonfemed On auGh BcoaFd by State
hawr
Existing text - XXXX
Stricken text — X -X
Added text —X
heights, additional
threatrato
publis safety,
eMFaerdnaFy
F cc
s
the va-rl-ame-
,is the MINMUFA
AOGeaswyt
wnsideft
the flood
s
s
P
Nil
■
.S
_ •
a
LZASNNKMJ
_• F AT
Existing text — XXXX
Stricken text -4
Added text —low
nature,it
showing the
,
14
_..
-mvrr
-
-TM ..
-111 tool
(i) Plans in tdpliGate dFawR to asale
showing the
,
14
Existing text" XXXX
Stricken text —X4XX
Added text—
b. The danger- that mater4als may be swept onto otheF lond
bOdges, GUIWAS
'
the abRity of these rystoms to preveAt disease,
GORtaMiRatiGn,
7.
III IT IN"ll—I
ON
-
i
b. The danger- that mater4als may be swept onto otheF lond
bOdges, GUIWAS
'
the abRity of these rystoms to preveAt disease,
GORtaMiRatiGn,
Existing text — XXXX 16
Stricken text -- XXXX
Added text-- 0 *
IN
Existing text — XXXX 16
Stricken text -- XXXX
Added text-- 0 *
Section 7. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage and
publication.
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Published
ATTEST
Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor
Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on
Send two affidavits of publication.
Bill to Edina City Clerk
CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do
hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the
Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of , 2013, and as
recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2013.
Existing text — XXXX 17
stricken text-
Added text — Xw
FE
n%LOLL
i o
i
.
i
i
J j
i
.40
I
7
G
25
I
i
€
i
1
ham-
..
4'
I i 0
F YA" ?LES
40 4-,-, So. a t
ARWoTolo A t BZ& 0
or
$1
99
P9406164
coo[
3a�
sa
D IIST 146
to 0E
w
SO- fOOr LOTS r6.7S0 sf,
al N
�i's S�b'L� S1o�
IL-5
I OE
a
looj 06S
16-S
NEI
ji
�Y's Sl L'6 � SLOI 100- 69
.w
71Y/liiX3
1, f
IV .
Ls
o/Q
200)
013SO4444
537.50. Maximum height. (See height definition and Maximum Height Diagram.) (a) In general. The
maximum height for all accessory structures shall be limited to the maximum height requirements for principal
structures in the district in which the accessory structure is located, except as otherwise provided in this zoning
ordinance.
(b)Acoessory structures located in the residence and ORI Districts. A detached accessory structure,
accessory to a principal use located in a residence or ORI district shall not exceed the height of the principal
structure or twelve (12) feet, whichever is less. The maximum height may be increased to sixteen (16) feet or the
height of the principal structure, whichever is less, where the primary exterior materials of the accessory structure
match the primary exterior materials of the principal structure and the roof pitch matches the primary roof pitch of
the principal structure, and provided the wall height shall not exceed. ten (10) feet from the floor to the top plate.
(c) Accessory structures located In all other districts. Structures accessory to a structure originally designed
or intended as a single or two-family dwelling or a multiple -family dwelling of three (3) or four (4) units, shall not
exceed the height of the principal structure or twelve (12) feet, whichever is less. The maximum height may be
ince eased to sixteen (16) feet or the height of the principal structure, whichever is "less, where the primary exterior
materials of the accessory structure match the primary exterior materials of the principal structure, and provided
the wall height shall not exceed ten (10) feet from the floor to the top plate.
537.60. Maximum floor area. (a) In general. The floor area of any accessory structure shall be included in
the total allowable floor area permitted on the zoning lot.
(b) Accessory uses and structures located in the residence and ORI Districts.
(1) Single and two-family dwellings. The maximum floor area of all detached accessory structures, and any
attached accessory use designed or intended to be used for the parking of vehicles, shall not exceed six
hundred seventy-six (676) square feet or ten (lit) percent of the lot area, whichever is greater, not to
exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet. Detached accessory structures greater than six hundred
seventy-six (676) square feet in area shall utilize primary exterior materials that match the primary
exterior materials of the principal structure and the roof pitch shall match the roof pitch of the principal
structure.
(2) All other uses. The maximum floor area of all detached accessory structures, and any attached
accessory use designed or intended to be used for the parking of vehicles, except for a parking garage
within the building, entirely below grade or of at least two (2) levels, shall not exceed six hundred
seventy-six (676) square feet or ten (10) percent of the lot area, whichever is greater.
(c) Accessory uses and structures located in all other zoning districts. The maximum floor area of all
detached accessory structures and arty attached accessory use designed or intended to be used for the parking of
vehicles, accessory to a structure originally designed or intended as a single or two-family dwelling or a multiple -
family dwelling of three (3) or four (4) units, shall not exceed six hundred seventy- six (676) square feet or ten
(10) percent of the lot area, whichever is greater.
537.80. Distance from dwelling. No detached accessory building or open parking space shall be located
closer than six (6) feet from a dwelling of any type. Detached parking garages serving residential uses shall be
located entirety to the rear of the principal residential structure.
� t
535.90. Minimum size and width, principal entrance and windows, and4ocation of attached garage
t
,p ! tftqu reiments for residential uses. (d) Attached garage facing the front lot line. Attached accessory uses
designed or intended for the parking ofvehicles accessory to single and two-family dwellings and multiple -family
dwellings of three (3) and four (4) units shall extend no more than five (S) feet closer to the front lot dine than the>
facade of a habitable portion of the dwelling when the garage door or doors face the front lot line. in addition, the
width of the garage wall facing the front lot line shall not exceed sixty (60) percent of the width of the entire
structure.
535.280. Obstructions in required yards; (See ]required Setbacks Diagrams) (d) ` Interior side yards for
detached buildings accessory to dwellings. The interior side yard requirement for a detached accessory building
2 A minimum 64nch setback from the property to the cave edge is also required. the building code may require a larger getback or shorWr
cave based on distance to property line.
3 A"
Lacey Municipal Code e,-'` / �/"m / �� j Page 1 of 1
TABLE 14T-25
(Referred from LMC 14.23.072)
Garage doors
may not occupy
more then 60%
of the ground
floor facade
Garage doors facing the street may not occupy more than sixty percent of the ground floor
facade.
View Web Version
A�
http://www.codepublishing. com/WAILacey/mobile/index.pl?pg=Lacey l4T/Lacey l 4T25.ht... 4/18/2013
,.n Of Plainfield, IN
f. Additional Siding' Materials: Those portIns of a wall area not required
to utilize a brick or stone veneer may use other durable siding materials.
Siding materials such as: "HARDIPLANK(R)° Siding by James Hardie,
' Weatherboard(Ry` by Gertainteed, or other similar fiber cement
products, wood clapboard siding; wood beaded siding; or,
stuccoldryvittE.I;F.S, shall be considered acceptable siding materials.
Aluminum siding less than 0.024 thickness shall not be permitted (except
In soffit areas). Vinyl siding shall not he permitted (except in soffit areas),
unless complying with provisions of Table 7A - Specifications for Use
and Installation of Vinyl Sidinn.
g. Compatibility of Garages: Garages should use exterior siding
materials and architectural elements consistent with and in the same
proportions as required for the primary building.
If a residential developer/ builder desires to not follow the basic standards
desired by the Town of Plainfield for single family or two family residential
developments, then the design guidelines and design features set forth below
are recommended.
B. Design Guidelines and Design Features.
The Town of Plainfield encourages developers l builders to use the following guidelines
to create variety and interest In all elevations of home. The Town also strongly
encourages builders to exceed the fecommendations contained in these guidelines on all
model homes built In a subdivision.
Garages -Alt single family dwellings and two family dwellings with accessory
rages, either detached orattached, should comply with the following
a. Design Features for One or Two Gar Garages - All one or two car
garages, either detached or attached, should utilize at least one (1) of
the following three (3) design features:
(1) Garage Off -Set- Development of single family dwellings or
two family dwellings in which the front facade of on attached or
detached front loading garage Is off -set and stepped back from
the front building line by at least ten (10) feel
(2) Garage as Percent of Faosde - Garage doors shall not
comprise more than forty (40) percent of the linear length of the
ground floor, street facing fa :ade of the primary building
containing a dwelling unit.
(3) Side or Rear Loaded Garages - Utilization of a side loaded or
rear loaded garage to minimize the impact ofthe garage doors
on the streetscape.
(See pages 2-2 and 2-3 of the pdf version of this section for
photographs and drawings of appropriate design features for
One or Two Car Garages.)
b. Additional Design Features:
(1) More than Two Car Garages - No more than two (2) one car
garage doors nor one (1) two -car garage door should be located
on the same architectural plane of front elevation. Architectural
planes for additional sets of garage doors on a front elevation
should be off -set by a minimum of twelve (12) inches.
(2) Maximum Driveway Width - No driveway should exceed
twenty (20) feet in width at the sidewalk.
Page 2 of 7
http:lltownofplainfield.com/inainlindex.plap?dept=2&action—l5&sttbtype 42&page=l&id... 4/1$12013
DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY AND iNSPECTtONS
RiarrdoX. Cervantes, Director
OF SAINT PAUL 315✓acluort Street, Seire 220 relepha+e: Sit -166.8989
her B. Colenu^ Armor stunt Paul, MUutem#a 35101-18M Faainalle: 651-26"124
Web: lvtvw lrpauGgov/doi
6`
ZONING REGULATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL USES
GARAGE, SHED, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND PARKING SPACES
Sec, 63.501. - Accessory buildings and uses.
Accessory buildings, except as otherwise provided in this code, shall be subject to the
following regulations:
(a) When the accessory building is structurally attached to a main building, it shall be subject to,
and must conform to, ail regulations ofthis code applicable to main buildings.
(b) Accessory buildings, structures or uses shall not be erected in or established in a required
yard except a rear yard. The following additional standards shall apply to residential
Parking:
(1) Access to off-street parking shall be from an abutting improved alley when
available, except where it is determined in the review of a site plan application that
there are circumstances unique to the property that make this impractical,
unreasonable, or harmful to the public safety. On corner lots, access to parking may
be from the side street.
(2) Off-street parking spaces shall not be located within the front yard.
(3) Garages shall be set back from the front lot line'at toast as far as the principal
structure (in the case of attached garages, this refers to the non -garage part of the
structure).
Except in the rew yard, garage doors that face a public street shall be no more than
nine (9) feet in height and shall not exceed sixty (60) percent of the width of the
principal structure facing the same street.
(5) Passenger vehicles may be parked on an approved driveway In front or side yards
provided the driveway leads to a legal parking space.
(c) On corner lots, accessory buildings, structures or uses shall be set back from the street a
distance equal to that required of the principal structure.
When an accessory building, structure or use is constructed in a rear yard which adjoins a
side yard or front yard, the accessory bui Iding, structure or use shall be sat back from the
interior lot line a distance equal to the minimum. side yard required of the principal structure.
On all other lots, accessory buildings shall be setback at least three (3) feet from all interior
lot lines, and overhangs shall be set back at least one-third (113) the distance of the setback
of the garage wall or one (1) foot, whichever is greater.
(d) This setback requirement from all interior lot lines -for accessory ory buildings in rear yards shall
be waived when a maintenance easement is recorded as to the affected properties, when
proof of such recorded easement is provided at the time of application for a building permit
and when the accessory building is located at least three (3) feet from any building on an
adjoining tot. The recording of the maintenance easement shall be interpreted to mean that
K
rr lzi
V)
I....J
u
Q)
4-JZ5
�J
4--J
s
�•
cLnW
, t
°
Ute„/�
.�"
0
4J
4—
U)
—0.�
4-.jtom!')
+-�
"
Ct3 ° •.—�'
M
i
e
(3)
C)
(Z �•
Q1 4--J
�
'
X
N i2 to
c�
d.!
4--J4-+
U
i
m
Cm
m
Q)
c6
CSA
X
W Ln c
rr lzi
Recommended Code Changes
33.130 Commercial Zones
3. Length of street -facing garage wall.
a Generally. The length of the garage wall facing the street may be un to
50 percent of the length of the street -facing building facade. See
Figure 130-3 On corner lots, only one street -facing garage wall must
meet this standard.
July 27, 1999
Figure 130-3
Length of Street -Facing Garage Wall
STREET
Base Zone Design Standards: City Council Adopted Report
�ll
Page 109
Commentary
33.130.250.E. Garages (continued)
3.b. Exception.
All houses—regardless of their width—are guaranteed a 12 ft. wide attached garage. On
buildings less than 24 ft. wide, if the garage exceeds more than 50 percent of the length
of the building's street -facing fagade, then there must be interior living area or a covered
balcony above the garage. The balcony or living area may not be located more than 4 feet
behind the garage wall. This dimension is required to ensure that these areas above the
garages are large enough to bring the living area of the house closer to the street on
narrow houses where,the garage dominates the length of the street -facing fargade.
Figures 130-4.
This figure will be included in the Zoning Code. It illustrates a typical development
scenario of a dwelling less than 24 ft. wide that meets the length of street -facing garage
wall standard by providing living area over the garage.
Base Zone Design Standards: City Council Adopted Report
July 27, 1999
Page 110
Recommended Code Changes
33.130 Commercial Zones
b Exception Where the street -facing fagade of the building is less than
24 feet long the garage wall facing the street may be up to 12 feet long
if there is one of the following. See Figure 130-4.
(1) Interior living area above the garage. The living area must be set
back no more than 4 feet from the street -facing garage wall, or
(2) A covered balcony above the garage that is:
a At least the same length as the street-facing_garage wall:
a At least 6 feet deep: and
a Accessible from the interior living area of the dwelling unit.
Figure 130-4
Length of Street -Facing Garage Wall Exception
Interior
living area
age
12 ft. Maximum
Less than 24 ft.
Front elevation
Interior
living area
® ® above garage
R0 0 4ft.orW5
from front of
garage wall
Left side elevation
Base Zone Design Standards: City Council Adopted Report
July 27, 1999 Page 111
4�C
Commentary
33.130.250.E. Garages (continued)
4.a. Generally.
The street lot line setback garage standard requires that the garage be no closer to the
street than the longest street -facing wall of the dwelling unit. (The Zoning Code describes
the dwelling unit as the portion of a building that is living area. The garage is not included;
it is an accessory structure.) Requiring the garage to be flush with, or behind, the longest
street -facing wall of the dwelling unit ensures that the living areas are as close, or closer,
to the street than the garage. This strengthens the connection the living areas have to
the public realm.
Initially, the proposed standards required the garage to be at least 3 ft. behind the
longest street -facing wall of the dwelling unit. The Planning Commission changed the
general requirement to allow a garage to be flush with the street -facing wall. The Planning
Commission made these changes based on public testimony they heard. Their recommended
standard allows more design flexibility.
Figure 130-5.
This figure will be included in the Zoning Code. It illustrates a typical development
scenario that would meet the street lot line setback standard for garages. Although the
garage is flush with the longest street -facing wall of the dwelling unit, it could also be
located behind it.
Base Zone Design Standards: City Council Adopted Report
July 27, 1999 Page 112
Recommended Code Changes
33.130 Commercial Zones
4. Street lot line setbacks.
a Generally. A garage wall that faces a street may be no closer to the
street lot line than the longest street -facing wall of the dwelling unit.
See Figure 130-5.
July 27, 1999
Figure 130-5
Street Lot Line Setback
GARAGE DWELLING
UNIT
Main
entrance
Longest
Street -facing
wall of dwelling
unit
Front lot line
Sidewalk
STREET
Base Zone Design Standards: City Council Adopted Report
4, e
Page 113
Single -Family Districts Zoning Code
City of Alamo Heights Code of Ordinances
five (25) feet, except as specifically provided in section 3-81, special front
yard regulations.
Maximum front yard setback
No building, structure or use shall hereafter be located, erected or
altered in the SF -A District so as to have a greater front yard than thirty
(30) feet.
SF -A and SF -B Districts.
Main Structure Articulation: The maximum exterior front wall plane
width without a minimum of a two (2) foot by ten (10) foot offset is thirty j
(30) feet or a combination of one (1) of the following architectural or
utilitarian features every thirty (30) feet to break up the monotony of the
facade:
1. Projecting bay or box windows, cantilevered, rather than
supported by a permanent foundation (not to exceed twenty-
five (25) percent of the fagade length)
2. Stoops
3 k�
Single -Family Districts Zoning Code
City of Alamo Heights Code of Ordinances
3. Porches (covered and unenclosed)
4. Balconies
5, Structural window awnings or canopies
6. Roof dormers
4 AK.
ingle-Family Districts Zoning Code
ity of Alamo Heights Code of Ordinances
7. Pilasters
8. Chimneys (minimum depth of one (1) foot and not to exceed
twenty-five (25) percent of the fagade)
9. A second -story roof overhang (at least twenty-five 25
percent of the fagade length)
0
Single -Family Districts Zoning Code
City of Alamo Heights Code of Ordinances
Exception: A one-story unenclosed roofed front porch up to fifteen
(15) feet in height may encroach into the required front yard setback up to
six (6) feet if it is at least six (6) feet deep.
(Ord. No. 1750-C, § 2, 1-28-08)
Sec. 3-15. - Side yard setbacks and side articulation.
SF -A and SF -B Districts.
No building, structure or use shall hereafter so as to have a smaller
side yard on each side of a building than hereinafter specified, except as
specifically provided in section 3-82, special side yard regulations.
(1) The minimum side yard setback for the main structure on
the driveway side is ten (10) feet.
(2) The minimum side yard setback for the main structure
on the non -driveway side is six (6) feet.
(3) The minimum side yard setback for an accessory
structure is three (3) feet.
h
_eMain Structure Articulation: The maximum exterior side wall plane
widtWithout a minimum of a two (2) foot by ten (10) foot offset is thirty
'(30) feet or a combination of one (1) of the following architectural or
utilitarian features every thirty (30) feet to break up the monotony of the
fagade:
1. Projecting bay or box windows cantilevered, rather than
supported by a permanent foundation (not to exceed twenty-
five (25) percent of the fagade length)
2. Stoops (not to exceed twenty-five (25) percent of the fagade)
3. Porches (covered and unenclosed, not to exceed twenty-five
(25) percent of the fagade)
4. Chimneys (minimum depth of one (1) foot and not to exceed
twenty-five (25) percent of the fagade)
5. Structural window ( awnings or canopies not to exceed
;i
twenty-five (25) percent of the fagade) i
6. Roof dormers
Single -Family Districts Zoning Code
City of Alamo Heights Code of Ordinances
7. Pilasters
8. A second -story roof overhang (at least twenty-five 25
percent of the fagade length)
9. Porte-cocheres (see definition in Sec. 3-2 and Sec. 3-21.
Required Off -Street Parking exception #4)
Exception: The minimum an air conditioning unit or pool unit can
be located from a property line or fence is three (3) feet and air
conditioning units must be located as close as possible to a
main or accessory structure.
(Ord. No. 1750-C, § 2, 1-28-08)
Sec. 3-16. - Rear yard setbacks.
SF -A and SF -13 Districts.
No building, structure or use shall hereafter be located, erected or
altered so as to have a smaller rear yard than hereinafter specified, except
as specifically provided in section 3-83, special rear yard regulations.
(1) The minimum rear yard setback for the main structure is
twenty (20) feet for the first story and thirty (30) feet for a
second story.
(2) The minimum setback of a garage from a main structure
is four (4) feet.
(3) The minimum rear yard setback of an accessory
structure is three (3) feet.
Exceptions:
(1) The minimum an air conditioning unit or a pool unit
can be located from a property line or fence is three
(3) feet and air conditioning units must bel ocated as
close as possible to a main or accessory structure.
(2) For purposes of calculating rear yard setbacks for
the main structure, a covered breezeway attached to
both the accessory and main structures shall not be
considered part of the main structure. The breezeway
must be no more than eight (8) feet wide and twelve
(12) feet tall, must be unenclosed, must be
CPC-2007-106-CA—Attachment II
i
es
Page 3
This ordinance also prevents the irreversible adverse impacts associated with the
new construction and additions at the current 3:1 FAR which result in out -of -scale
structures that will otherwise be permitted by -right, and further degrade the
quality of life in existing single-family residential neighborhoods.
Another reason for the proliferation of out -of -scale structure is the use of
Buildable Area to determine maximum development potential on a single-family
zoned lot. The proposed solution utilizes the lot area as a base from which FAR
is determined, rather than the Buildable Area currently used in the Municipal
Code. By tying development potential directly to lot size and to individual zones,
the ratio of house size to lot size is maintained proportionally across different lot
sizes within each zone, and the development standards for each of the eight
zones are further distinguished.
New Floor Area Ratios for Each Single -Family Zone
There are eight distinct single-family zones affected by the proposed ordinance.
The proposed solution reflects the differences in the eight zone designations and
establishes a base floor area ratio for each zone, based on lot size. As a direct
result, two-story structures will automatically have larger setbacks than single -
story structures of the same floor area.
Under the current code standards, setbacks do not increase by default as the lot
size increases. This has resulted in the construction of two-story homes on large
lots with little air space between neighboring structures. To remedy this, the
reduced floor area ratio is tied directly to lot size and is in addition to setback
requirements in the zone, resulting in larger setbacks on two-story structures.
The new base Floor Area Ratios ranging from 0.25:1 on RA lots to 0.5:1 on R1
lots respect the characteristics of these zones and address most of the factors
that contribute to Mansionization.
;_Articulation Bonus
The purpose of the Articulation Bonus is to encourage quality design of single-
family homes. There are. two ways of achieving the bonus. The Proportional
Stories method allows for slightly larger two-story structures by granting a floor
area bonus of 20% of the maximum Single -Family Residential Floor Area as long
as the stories other than the Base Floor are not greater than seventy-five percent
of the Base Floor. This tool will provide a floor area incentive that encourages
articulation by requiring that the second floor be smaller than the first floor,
thereby changing the perception of size and scale of a structure. The Facade
Modulation Bonus allows for slightly larger two-story structures by granting a floor
area bonus of 20% of the maximum Single -Family Residential Floor Area as long
as 25% of the building frontage facing the street is stepped back from the front
facade by a minimum of 20% of the total building depth. To ensure that the FAR
reduction does not result in inequitable restrictions on substandard R1 lots,. the
Bonus is raised to 30% in order to allow for reasonably -sized homes that are also
well-designed on the exterior. Both the Proportional Stories method and the
Facade Modulation method are flexible in terms of design, allowing the property
owner to determine where this area is to be used.
b) Amend Height Limits for Single -Family Zones
Roofs are a defining characteristic of single-family homes; articulated roofs add
visual interest to a structure and provide transitions between properties.
Therefore, the proposed ordinance establishes new standards to differentiate
between sloped and flat roofs. The proposed ordinance lowers the allowable
PROUD HOMEOWNER IN EDINA
February 26, 2013
Coy Teague ,
Community Development Director
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Kevin Staunton
Community Development member
Dear Mr, Teague and Staunton,
I am attaching a letter I sent to the contractors, Elevation and Refined. I realize you have been battling
this issue for sometime now and hopefully you are making progress with setting protocols and limitations.
This over abundance of building in our neighborhoods - especially the South Harriett neighborhood in
which I live - is REALLY getting to be too much.
Them is SIMPLY no regards for our neighborhood, the noise violations, the constant toll on our new
streets with the various large trucks up and down the block, and the end result of how the new
construction may not work. I currently live in a beaufful 2100 sq! home that has been MORE THAN
ADEQUATE for our family. I understand that new families want "new", they want "spacious" and user-
friendly spaces - but why must we allow them to tear down our smaller seated homes? As I state in my
letters to the two contractors, what is being built in the absence of the quaint and different smaller homes,
are boring, repetitive homes. We truly are losing our quaint aesthetic footprint and looking more and
more like Eden Prairie. Is this what you want?
I am begging you and your peers to PLEASE took at what is happening to our neighborhoods. You have
heard all the comments before, but it truly a travesty. Please look out for the betterment of our
neighborhoods.
Thank you.
Frustrated Edina homeowener
PROUD HOMEOWNER IN EDINA
February 26, 2013
Nate Wissink
Project. Director, Elevation Homes
18312 Minnetonka Blvd
Wayzata, MN 55391
Dear Mr. Wissink,
I am writing to you on behalf of your once -again soliciting letter regarding our house and our desired
neighborhood.
Your letter wrote about having so many "interested buyers" and not "enough homes available". I can not
tell you bow sick I was to receive, yet again, another contractor's letter describing a desire for us to sell
our home to an "interested party". We must get one every other couple weeks.
We GET that our South Harriet neighborhood home is positioned in a much desired area, but thanks to
you and your peers„ our neighborhood is very QUICKLY looking like a new subdivision of Eden Prairie.
Thanks to you and your style of construction we now have neighborhoods being overwhelmed with
same -style houses, no yards what -so -ever, and nothing but 30+ young, wealthy families moving in and
wiping out our multi -generational neighborhoods. With your big pillar front stoops and your beige
siding, we are becoming a very bland neighborhood. I can pick an Elevation Home out in a heartbeat -
not to mention how you decide to pick pockets where your same -ole architecture prevails, one after
another. Let me site West 56th Street as a prime example. With the two very nice holes you have chosen
to simultaneously dig in the last couple of weeks, I have come across about three near accidents with your
various trucks in the way and a congested area of people taming off of Concord Avenue. Not only is
your traffic of trucks a huge hassle, but it is very dangerous with the slew of kids that walk to and from
Concord and South View. We saw this happen on Woodland Road a year or two ago, with your many
projects with repetitive appeal - same, same same.
I understand you run a business. I understand that if buyers are willing to buy a perfectly fine home, tear it
down and disgustingly build a brand new home, why not"? And for this I blame our City officials for not
putting an adequate plug on the problem - which is why I am cc:ing them as well. It has become VERY
APPARENT that they obviously do not care about the integrity of our neighborhoods and for the multi-
generational aspects of our neighborhoods, but only on the greediness of the young buyers and contractors
(such as Elevation) and their own business objective - GET MONEY, GET BUILT no matter who goes
down and what is leftl
I am asking you to no longer send out solicitation letters. If we want to sell our beautiful, smaller than
average house to you and your peers, we know how to find you and your conglomerating, greedy,
creative -less selves. Until then - let us be. Quit taking over our streets, making the messes, producing
the constant noise, and tearing down our mature lots with the same "Stepford" homes you and your peers
(Great Neighborhood Homes, Refined, etc.) continue to do. Please take your business back to YOUR
corporate neighbor in Wayzata - we don't want you here.
Signed,
A veryconcerned and frustrated Edina homeowner who would like to look back over my years here and
W proud of the neighborhood and how it looked, how it aged and how there was a variety of architecture
- all just fine and appropriate to hand down to the next generation without tearing it down and building
beige mcMansions.
cc; t ,.ary Teague, Edina Pltuemg Commission,, Edina Clay Hall
Kevin Staunton, Edina Planning Commission
Cary Teague
From: Mark C. Dietzeri <mdietzen@lindquist.com>
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:15 PM
To: Cary Teague
Subject: Zoning Ordinance Amend ment.Consideration
Mr. Teague,
My name is Mark Dietzen: I am an Edina resident and live at 4901 Bruce Avenue. I have been monitoring the Planning
Commission's discussions on amending the residential zoning ordinances, and wanted to briefly comment on this
matter. Although I understand that the amendments are currently being drafted, it appears from a*review of your April
10 memo and from watching the April 10 Planning Commission meeting online that several changes are being explored
including increasing side yard setbacks, requiring that window wells be included in the side yard setbacks, decreasing
total building height restrictions, and reducing building coverage amounts. .
As discussed below, I believe that these proposed changes will have a significant unintended consequence - they will
drastically limit an existing Edina homeowner's ability to remodel his or her home.
The April 10 proposals and the discussion of the Planning Commission make it clear that perceived abuses in recent new
Home construction has generated concern in portions of Edina and with the commission. Some residents of Edina are
very upset with large, tall houses being built next to much smaller houses and are also fed up with the lack of
knowledge, supervision, and monitoring of the building.of these massive structures.
Many of these concerns were addressed when the Edina City Council passed an ordinance creating a full-time
coordinator position that will oversee teardowns and improve enforcement and consistency of the new home
construction rharket in Edina. The new zoning amendment proposals are intended to go a step further and stop a
builder from constructing a house that is too big for the neighborhood. Unfortunately, the proposed amendments will
also apply to existing homes in Edina.
I am in the process of finalizing remodeling plans for my home in the Country Club District of Edina. I am bound by the
same ordinances that would apply to new home construction. In addition, because I live in the Country Club District, I
must also have my plans approved by the Historic Preservation Board (assuming the front or side fagade of my home is
changing (I am on a corner lot)).
The proposed zoning changes will significantly constrain my project if they are applied to existing homes. Forexample:
Side Yard Setback: If the proposed side yard setback proposals are approved, my home, and I suspect that a
great number of homes in the Country Club District and Edina as a whole, will be non -conforming. If this occurs, the
existing ordinance allows me to use only an additional 200 feet of non -conforming space. This verysmall amount of
space will dramatically reduce my options for an addition. Basically, I will be unable to build an addition of a size that
justifies the construction expense.
Further, my lot is irregular in shape. The commission's discussions seem to assume that the lots are all
rectangular. Although the front of my lot is 50 feet wide, the rear lot line is 90 feet. Because of this irregular lot, the
current ordinance requires that the width of the lot be taken 50 feet from the front of the lot. Will this continue to be
the case?
Finally, it is my understanding that both a minimum side yard setback and a combined total side yard setback will be
proposed. Because I am on a corner lot, combining the side yard setbacks will not work for my property. Will I be able
to use the minimum side yard setback for one side of my home and disregard the total side yard setback
requirement? To make matters more complicated, both'the side yard and the street side portion of my home is non-
conforming with current setback requirements. How would this fact impact the calculations and impact on my ability to
remodel my home and build a modest addition?
Window Well Exception: If the window well exception is removed, again, a significant number of homes in the
Country Club District and Edina as a whole would be non -conforming. This proposed change would also more
significantly limit my abilityto build an addition to my home with a window well on the side of the house. I understand
that there needs to be space to get from the front yard to the back yard, but including a window well into the setback
requirement would force residents in the Country Club District to stop building egress windows on the side of their
houses. This does not seem to be the intended result.
Height Restriction:.) do not understand how the height restriction is to be applied. Will my proposed addition
be In violation of this ordinance if its height matches the existing height of my home (assuming my home is 35 feet
tall)? Will new homes being built in the country club district be limited to 30 feet in height when nearly all of the homes
in the area are over 30 feet in height?
Building Coverage: I believe that a significant number of the lots in the Country Club District are less than
9,000 square feet. If this proposed amendment is passed, a great number of homes in the district will have very limited
space to build an addition due to the high density nature of the district. This does not seem to be the intended result.
I believe that applying the proposed amendments to existing homes in the Country Club District will significantly impact
the ability of homeowners in the district to remodel their homes in a modest way in fitting with the neighborhood and
surrounding properties. In addition, I believe it will cause new homes being built in the district to be much smaller than
the existing homes in the neighborhood. I found the Star Tribune's editorial from March 26, 2013, to be directly on
point when the editorial board stated:
"Complaints from residents have led Edina officials to consider additional steps. Hiring a full-time coordinator to
oversee residential teardowns may improve enforcement and consistency. It's a good move. But the town should be
cautious in tweaking its current regulations, 'which seem to be working on most projects. The aim should be to
Improve consistency, not drive away investment. Another avenue might involve reaching out to builders proactively,
letting them know graphically what the community expects, showing them the projects that have worked over the
past five years and the ones that have not.
Some neighbors will always oppose change, but successful cities are in a constant state of renewal. The trick is to
insist on the highest standards and to make sure that new homes, while they maybe a bit larger,.don't detract from
the character of the existing community."
I would urge the Planning Commission to consider the unintended consequences of the proposed zoning ordinance
changes on homes in the Country Club District and forego the proposed changes. The new coordinator and the Historic
Preservation Board will protect the overall character of the Country Club District and ensure that remodeling, additions
and new construction are appropriate. I believe that the proposed zoning ordinance changes tip the balance too far in
favor of the status quo. Neighborhoods should be allowed to grow modestly and new investment in properties should
be encouraged or neighborhoods will stagnate and decay.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Mark Dietzen
Cary Teague
From: aporter@refinedIlc.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 24,.2013 9;52 AM
To: Cary Teague; Kris Aaker
Subject: Planning commision
Cary/Kris,
I spent a little bit of time reviewing the agenda for tonight's planning commission meeting and have some
concerns. Although I will be unable to be present for the meeting I wanted to make sure the
commissioners have a few of my thoughts. Please forward this to the them.
1, It appears the suggested changes would affect everyone on lots under 75 in one way or another. We
live in a neighborhood of homes which most lots are 50 x 135. Most of the homes were built in the 40's
and 50's and are one story or 1 1/2 story homes with detached garages. These are modest homes with
main floor living spaces in the 900 to 1200 sq feet. When you add in the detached garage you are already
at/near/over the new proposed hardcover max. The proposed hardcover rules of 25% versus 30% would
essentially eliminate the ability of these homeowners to expand their foot print at all; to add a porch,
expand a living room/kitchen, add a strongly needed 3rd bedroom on the main floor. This would force the
homeowner to move to a larger lot, or take on a much more expensive project forcing them to build a less
desired 2nd story on the home.
2. Why is the Heritage District allowed to have 30% and not required to have 25%? Are we saying that
that street-scape is desirable for that 50 foot lot neighborhood, but not for the other 50 foot lot
neighborhoods?
3. Isn't increasing the current sideyard setbacks on 50 lots (not on 49' 11" lots) an extra 2 feet going to
make the houses narrower and longer? Doesn't that affect the solar orientation of the neighbor for more
of the day?
4. I think the.reduced ridge height and eliminated sideyard'wall height are great ideas and should be
adopted. These alone should help with a lot of the street-scape issues of concern. Remodels and new
homes will blend much better in with existing homes with this single change .... more cape cods, more
colonials, less "A" frames.
5. Accessing ones own rear yard without trespassing onto the neighbors property seems to be logical, but
if it requires more regulation to happen ... so be it. That being said I do not understand why a homeowner
cannot add a lower level bedroom to their home in one side yard set back as long as the other side allows
access to the rear yard. It seems like #3 in the "Drainage" paragraph should suffice.
6. Sidewall articulation requirement seems so impractical on 50'. lots, I don't know where to begin. This
was well vetted in Wayzata and doesn't make sense.
Thank you for considering my comments.
Andy Porter
REFINED
Cell: 612.991.9301
Fax: 952.303.3170
Email: aporter@,)RefinedLLC.com
www.RefinedLLC.com