Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2024-05-08 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Packet
Ag enda Planning Commission City Of E dina, Minnesota City Council Cham ber s Wednesday, May 8, 2024 7:00 PM Watch the m eeting on cable TV or at EdinaMN.gov/LiveMeeting s or Facebook.com /EdinaMN. Participate in Public H ear ing(s): Call 312-535-8110 E nter access code 2634 593 3835 Password is 5454 Press *3 on your telephone keypad when you would like to g et in the queue to speak A sta8 m em ber will unmute you when it is your turn I.Ca ll To Ord er II.Roll Ca ll III.Approva l Of Meeting Agenda IV.Approva l Of Meeting Min u tes A.Regular Meeting Min u tes from Ap ril 11, 2024 V.Special Recogn ition s An d Presentation s A.Un iversity of Minnesota Resilient Com m u n ities Project Stu d y Report VI.Com m u n ity Com m ent During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share relevant issues or concerns. 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. G enerally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board/Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Board/Commission might refer the matter to sta% for consideration at a future meeting. VII.Pu b lic Hea rings A.B-24-03 Variance request for 5416 Grove VIII.Rep orts/Recom m en d ation s A.Lincoln a n d Lon d onderry Sm a ll Area Plan W orkin g Grou p Cha ir Selection IX.Cha ir An d Mem ber Com m ents X.Sta5 Com m ents XI.Adjournm en t 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 ampli8cation, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Date: May 8, 2024 Agenda Item #: I V.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: Minutes F rom:Liz O ls on, P lanning Adminis trative S upport S pec ialis t Item Activity: Subject:R egular Meeting Minutes from April 11, 2024 Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: Approve R egular Meeting Minutes and S pecial Work S ession M inutes from April 11, 2024. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description Regular Meeting Minutes 4-11-24 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 1 of 3 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission Edina City Hall Council Chambers April 11, 2024 I. Call To Order Chair Bennett called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Alkire, Bornstein, Miranda, Daye, Padilla, Smith, Hahneman, Felt, Hu, and Chair Bennett. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director, and Liz Olson, Administrative Support Specialist. Absent from the roll call: Commissioner Schultze. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Commissioner Miranda moved to approve the April 11, 2024, agenda. Commissioner Felt seconded the motion. Motion carried. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A. Minutes: Planning Commission, March 27, 2024 Commissioner Padilla moved to approve the March 27, 2024, meeting minutes and Special Work Session minutes. Commissioner Hahneman seconded the motion. Motion carried. V. Community Comment None. VI. Public Hearings A. Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Subdivision – 5120 & 5124 Hankerson Avenue Director Teague presented the request of Donnay Homes, Inc. for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Subdivision. Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, rezoning and subdivision, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff answered Commission questions. Appearing for the Applicant Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 2 of 3 Mr. Steve Behnke, Donnay Homes via Zoom, addressed the Commission and answered questions. Mr. Paul Donnay, Donnay Homes, helped answer Commission questions. Public Hearing Mr. Ryan Beckman, 5146 Hankerson, addressed the Commission regarding the HOA. Ms. Beth Johnson, 5012 Bedford, addressed the Commission with her concerns about the subdivision. Mr. James Pohle, 5148 Hankerson, addressed the Commission indicating his approval of the project. Commissioner Alkire moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Felt seconded the motion. Motion carried. The Commission discussed the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and subdivision and the meeting can be viewed on the official City website. Motion Commissioner Felt moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Subdivision at 5120 & 5124 Hankerson Avenue as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Hahneman seconded the motion. Motion carried 6 ayes, 3 nays (Padilla, Daye, Bornstein). B. Site Plan with Variance and Subdivision – Edina Endodontics, 7300 Metro Boulevard Director Teague presented the request of Edina Endodontics for a sit plan with variances and subdivision. Staff recommends approval of the site plan with variances and subdivision, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff answered Commission questions. Appearing for the Applicant Mr. Ben Krasnik, design team and Chris Whitehouse, architect, addressed the Commission and answered questions. Public Hearing None. Commissioner Felt moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Padilla seconded the motion. Motion carried. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2024 Page 3 of 3 Chair Bennett indicated his wife works for the development team so he would abstain from the vote. The Commission discussed the site plan with variance and subdivision for Edina Endodontics and the meeting can be viewed on the official City website. Motion Commissioner Felt moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the sit plan with variances and subdivision for Edina Endodontics at 7300 Metro Boulevard as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Daye seconded the motion. Motion carried 8 ayes, 0 nays, 1 abstain (Bennett). VII. Reports/Recommendations VIII. Chair and Member Comments Received. IX. Staff Comments Received. X. Adjournment Commissioner Felt moved to adjourn the April 11, 2024, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 9:10 PM. Commissioner Padilla seconded the motion. Motion carried. Date: May 8, 2024 Agenda Item #: V.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Matthew G abb, S us tainability S pec ialis t Item Activity: Subject:Univers ity of Minnesota R esilient C ommunities P roject S tudy R eport Information C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: None; information only. I N TR O D U C TI O N: I n 2025, the C ity will be analyzing Edina’s greenhouse gas emissions and the Climate Action P lan’s implementation to evaluate if we are on track to meet the C AP ’s emissions reduction goals. To prepare for that evaluation, the C ity applied for and received a U niversity of Minnesota R esilient Communities P roject (R C P ) student team. T he City was matched with a H umphrey S chool of P ublic Affairs graduate student capstone group composed of students in public policy, urban planning, and environmental science and technology. As this study’s findings will be applicable and transferable across the Twin C ities, the M etropolitan C ouncil helped sponsor the project. T he City asked the student team to analyze if the C AP ’s densification goals were sufficient to achieve its vehicle miles traveled (VM T ) reduction and transit ridership increase goals. T he team conducted statistical regressions, developed a transportation decision-making framework, and completed a peer city analysis. T his informed their statistical modeling in Urban Footprint (the same modeling software used by the Metropolitan Council) to analyze the impact various strategic density scenarios would have on VM T, transit ridership, and greenhouse gas emissions. T heir final study offers the C ity and region multiple paths forward to achieve the goals of both the C limate Action P lan and C omprehensive P lan. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Edina Dens ity Study Summary Pres entation The City of Edina (the City) has outlined a series of strategies in its Climate Action Plan (CAP) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while achieving economic growth, furthering social equity, and improving the well-being of the local environment. To help meet the City’s goal of 45% greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction by 2030, the CAP identifies five strategies related to transportation and land use patterns, three of which are of concern to this study: TL 1: Decrease community-wide vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by 7% by 2030 TL 2: Double public transit commuter ridership from 3.3% to 6.6% by 2030 TL 3: Increase average population per developed acre by 4% by 2030 This study seeks to better understand this relationship and determine whether the projected density increases are likely to be sufficient to meet the City’s transportation goals. Three research questions were asked: Is density the right approach? Which approaches to density are most effective? What policy actions are needed? Edina’s climate strategy must involve increasing density, a strategy which has proven effective for reducing VMT, especially in conjunction with other policies. However, a 4% increase in residential density will not be suffi- cient for Edina to meet its CAP goals. Edina should target density increases around specific nodes and corridors. City- wide density increases are less efficient at encourag- ing sustainable transpor- tation options like walking, rolling, transit, and biking. Recommended zoning strategies can be found on the reverse side. The City of Edina can take a range of policy actions aimed at allowing and encouraging targeted population density increases while maximizing the benefits of that densi- ty. Policy recommendations can be found below. Recommended Policy Actions Land Use Recategorize Neighborhood Nodes as Mixed-Use Centers, and Mixed-Use Centers as Community Activity Centers Achieve Thrive MSP 2040 Transportation Policy Plan density minimums in existing and future transit corridors Allow commercial uses at corner parcels on France Avenue, with at least duplexes permitted along the whole corridor Disallow new construction and/or operation of drive-thru enter- prises. When conducting corridor-based zoning, include abutting lots on parallel streets in addition to the corridor itself Continue to support ADU development Built Form Replace maximum building coverage requirement with existing maximum impervious surface coverage requirement Supplement maximum height and density standards with mini- mum height and density standards. Reduce minimum lot size to 4,500 square feet Decrease front setback requirements Adopt a set of objective design standards Reduce height transition requirements Transportation Eliminate parking requirements; if infeasible, cap maximums at one per unit at the highest. Study and remediate barriers to active transportation access to transit stops Update the TDM Policy with objective, points-based standards City of Edina Density Study Summary Humphrey School of Public Affairs Capstone Project – Spring 2024 Recommended Scenarios Existing Conditions “Basic”“Enhanced”“Preferred” Increases allowable density around the six “Areas of Change” as defined in Edina’s Comprehensive Plan as well as within a quarter mile of future E Line stations. The bare minimum of targeted density increases that will be required to move the needle on the Climate Action Plan goals. Builds on the previous scenario by adding softer density increases within 500 feet from the “Areas of Change” as well as within a quarter mile of a reimagined “Better Route 46”, which continues west from the Grandview neighborhood along Vernon Avenue and Lincoln Drive, terminating at the future Green Line Opus Station in Minnetonka. Adds increased allowable density within 500 feet of the Regional Bicycle Transportation Network as well as within a quarter mile of major healthcare facilities. This is the most impactful scenario for reaching Edina’s Climate Action Plan goals. Using the Urban Footprint software, we tested several scenarios to compare the effectiveness of different zoning strategies. Strategies which employed targeted density increases, around commercial areas, along transit corridors, and near regional bicycle trails consistently performed better than citywide density increases. We developed three recommended scenarios, combining the most effective strategies. Each of these scenarios builds upon the last, with the “Basic” scenario representing the bare minimum of zoning changes required to support a shift toward sustainable transportation modes in Edina. The “Preferred” scenario is the one that combines the most effective of all targeted density strategies, and will have a transformative change toward reaching Edina’s climate goals. The full analysis is available in the City of Edina Density Study report Zoning Scenario Analysis City of Edina Density Study Humphrey School of Public Affairs Capstone Project Spring 2024 Kenton Briggs, Holly Leaf, Greg Olberding, Johnny Menhennet, Jem Thompson, and Yuping Wu Instructor: Nichola Lowe Project Overview Purpose: The City of Edina wants to understand whether its current density goals, as outlined in the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP), are sufficient to meet its VMT reduction and commuter transit mode share targets by 2030. Transportation and Land Use goals: TL 1 – Decrease community-wide vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by 7% by 2030 TL 2 – Double public transit commuter ridership from 3.3% to 6.6% by 2030 TL 3 – Increase average population per developed acre by 4% by 2030 Why does this matter? ●In 2019, Edina committed to reducing emissions by 45% by 2030 ●Transportation accounted for 41% of carbon emissions in Edina in 2019 Therefore, decreasing VMT and increasing transit ridership are crucial for Edina to meet its climate goals. Research Questions Is density the right approach? Which approaches to density are most effective? What policy actions are needed? Icons by iconixar from Noun Project (CC BY 3.0) Key Conclusions ●Existing density targets will not be sufficient to meet VMT and transit ridership goals ●Targeted density performs better than citywide density ●Supporting policies will help maximize the benefits of density ●Density is about more than just transportation, higher density increases energy and water usage efficiency, further reducing GHG Zoning Scenario Analysis Icons by iconixar from Noun Project (CC BY 3.0) Scenario Analysis – Introduction ●Urban Footprint allows us to measure what changes may occur in scenarios based on zoning changes down to the parcel ●Four Metrics ○Density (DU/Acre) ○Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per Capita ○Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) per Capita ○Public Transit Mode Share (Transit Usage) ●Developed Impact Score to measure effectiveness of scenarios Scenario Approaches Icons by Lars Meiertoberens, Naut Astro, Arthur Shlain, Epic Icon Designs, & b farias from Noun Project (CC BY 3.0) Citywide Density ‘Areas of Change’ Sustainable Transportation Essential Destinations Base Scenario ‘Basic’ Scenario ●‘Areas of Change’ ●E Line Corridor Metric Change (%) Density 32.34% VMT/capita -17.29% GHG/capita -16.37% Transit Usage 13.35% ‘Enhanced' Scenario ●‘Area of Change’ with 500 ft Buffer ●E Line Corridor ●East-West Corridor (Better Metro Transit Route 46) Metric Change (%) Density 42.43% VMT/capita -22.09% GHG/capita -24.41% Transit Usage 13.34% ‘Preferred’ Scenario ●‘Areas of Change’ with 500 ft Buffer ●E Line Corridor ●East-West Corridor (Better Route 46) ●Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN) ●Major Healthcare Facilities Metric Change (%) Density 45.75% VMT/capita -25.01% GHG/capita -27.07% Transit Usage 13.87% Policy Recommendations Icons by iconixar from Noun Project (CC BY 3.0) Climate Action Plan Goal Amendments Primary Recommendation: A 4% residential density increase is insufficient to achieve other City-adopted goals. Align targets for population density with result-driven analysis of growth scenarios that do meet the VMT reduction and GHG reduction targets. The CAP, Comp Plan, and regional planning policy should agree on growth targets. Secondary Recommendation: In the Transportation and Land Use section, add a specific action that addresses active transportation mode share. Recommended Actions – Land Use Carbon emissions are inextricably tied to land use. We recommend enacting meaningful changes to land use policy in select areas to ensure Edina meets its own adopted CAP goals. Example Recommendation: Achieve density minimums along transit lines as set by the Metropolitan Council to encourage increased and reinstated transit service. In addition to being rewarded with increased transit service, this strategy dovetails with our data-driven scenario analysis which proves the mode shift impact of encouraging increased density near transit. Recommended Actions – Built Form Flexibility in built form is required to realize development consistent with Edina's climate goals. We recommend enacting meaningful changes to the built form guidelines to allow for a greater diversity of housing options, thereby aiding in CAP goals. Example Recommendation: For new multi-unit construction, replace building coverage requirement with existing impervious surface coverage requirements. This ensures that sites have more developmental flexibility and capacity but no adverse impact to runoff or green space. Recommended Actions – Transportation Climate goals are not achievable with changes to land use and built form alone. We recommend further action with regard to transportation policy to encourage more sustainable transportation choices. Example Recommendation: Update the City’s Travel Demand Management Policy with objective standards and a data-informed points-based methodology. Objective standards can streamline development, enhance the potential to get more transit cards into the hands of residents/employees, and increase accessibility to destinations through alternative means of travel. Thank You! Special Thanks Matthew Gabb, City of Edina Addison Lewis, City of Edina Marisa Bayer, City of Edina Andrew Scipioni, City of Edina Michael Greco, Resilient Communities Project Stina Kielsmeier-Cook, Resilient Communities Project Eric Wojchik, Metropolitan Council MacKenzie Young-Walters, Metropolitan Council David Burns, Metropolitan Council Dennis Farmer, Metropolitan Council Peter Wilfahrt, Metropolitan Council Samuel Limerick, Metropolitan Council Nichola Lowe, Humphrey School of Public Affairs Yingling Fan, Humphrey School of Public Affairs Frank Douma, Humphrey School of Public Affairs Greg Lindsey, Humphrey School of Public Affairs Angie Fertig, Humphrey School of Public Affairs Eric Lind, Center for Transportation Studies Duncan Kay, Urban Footprint Date: May 8, 2024 Agenda Item #: VI I.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Kris Aaker Assistant P lanner Item Activity: Subject:B-24-03 Varianc e reques t for 5416 G rove Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: Deny the variance request. I N TR O D U C TI O N: A 2.8-foot west and .3-foot east, side yard setback variance from the 10-foot requirement for a tear down/rebuild. B etter Together E dina P ublic Input AT TAC HME N T S: Description Staff Report Site location Applicant justification Engineering Memo Applicant Narrative Survey, Plans and renderings Applicant Pres entation Staff Pres entation Better Together Public Input Report The subject property is located on the north side of Grove Street consisting of a one-story walk- out home with an attached two-car garage built in 1985. The plan is to replace the existing nonconforming home with a new two-story home atop the existing nonconforming basement. The existing basement will include an addition into the rear yard. The new construction will replace a one-story single-family, two car garage home, with a two-story single-family three-car garage home. The plan removes the home to the foundation with the intention of retaining the existing basement while adding to the footprint into the rear yard. The applicant is requesting variances for the same nonconforming side yard setbacks as the existing home. The existing foundation is located 7.2 feet from the west lot line and 9.7 feet from the east lot line instead of the minimum 10-foot setback required. The proposed two-story design is considered new home construction. More than 50% of the exterior walls of the current home will be removed triggering a new home designation and requiring that all aspects conform with current zoning requirements. Planning must view the property as a vacant lot with opportunities to achieve compliance within the current ordinance standards with any new home construction. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Yancey Park zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential Easterly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single Unit residential homes; zoned R-1 and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features May 8, 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner B-24-03, A variance at 5416 Grove Street from Sec. 36-439 of the Edina City Code to allow for a 2.8-foot west and .3-foot east, side yard setback variance from the 10-foot requirement for a tear down/rebuild on an existing nonconforming foundation. Information / Background: STAFF REPORT Page 2 The subject property is a one-story home, built in 1985. The lot is 12,800 square feet in area and is located north of Grove Street. The subject property will have the current home removed to the top of foundation maintaining the existing nonconforming side yard setbacks for all new construction. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District Grading & Drainage The Environmental Engineer has reviewed the application and submitted comments as attached in their memorandum. Per Engineering, the site drains to a structural flooding issue thus volume control is required. A stormwater management plan and final as-built survey are required. The home is outside of the floodplain (910.3) and meets the 2’ freeboard standard as the existing LFE is 912.6. The exterior of the addition appears to be at roughly elevation 911.5. The exterior of the home must be floodproofed where the grade is less than 912.3. Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North Side – Side Yard West Side – Front Yard South Side – Rear Yard East Side – Side Yard 50 feet OHWE 10 feet 29.95 feet 10 feet 51.3 feet *7.2 feet/existing 31.1 feet/existing *9.7 feet/existing Building Height 35.4 feet 31 Feet proposed Building Coverage Surface coverage 25% 50% 18.3% proposed 27% proposed 1st floor elevation 924.4 feet 923.4 feet *Requires a variance STAFF REPORT Page 3 PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMMENDATION Optional Actions A case could be made for approval and denial of this project. Below provides options for the planning commission to consider: Primary Issue 1. Is the proposed variance justified? No. Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively to grant a variance. The proposed variance will not: 1) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. “Practical difficulties” may include functional and aesthetic concerns. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District and complies with zoning standards, except for the existing side yard setbacks. The ordinance classifies the project as a new home on a vacant lot and not as a “remodel” on an existing foundation. It is presumed that a conforming new home may be designed for the property/vacant lot and that there are no practical difficulties or conditions preventing compliance. The threshold has been met to classify the project as a new home, which is the only opportunity for the city to bring the property into compliance with current zoning requirements. City staff are unable to identify a practical difficulty that prevents reasonable use within the ordinance limitations. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created? The property is not unique in use, size, shape, or location. A new home can be built in compliance with the zoning ordinance but would require the removal of the basement, which is not the preference of the applicant. It is not the conditions of the lot that drive the need for a variance. The request is self-created and not a result of some unique aspect of the lot. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Granting the variance may possibly alter the essential character of the neighborhood. There is a general impression heard from residents that new homes are currently being over-built, are too tall and too close to lot lines even under current code limitations. Staff frequently hears from property owners who would like STAFF REPORT Page 4 to maintain existing nonconforming conditions on their property for new construction which is generally a much larger home than the previous home within an established and older neighborhood, believing the improvements will not violate the spirit or intent of the ordinance. Primary Issue Is the proposed variance justified? Yes. Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively to grant a variance. The proposed variance will: 1) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. “Practical difficulties” may include functional and aesthetic concerns. The proposed use is permitted in the R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District and complies with zoning standards, except for the existing side yard setbacks. The ordinance classifies the project as a new home on a vacant lot and not as a “remodel” with a new home constructed on an existing foundation. Keeping the foundation constructed in 1985 causes practical difficulties and conditions creating difficulty with compliance. The threshold has been met to classify the project as a new home, however, re-use of a solid precast spancrete foundation is both practical and sustainable. Staff identifies the existing nonconforming side yard setbacks as a practical difficulty that prevents reasonable use of an existing foundation within the current ordinance limitations. The side yard setbacks remain the same as when the home was constructed in 1985 and are similar to side yard setbacks of homes along the block and in the vicinity. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created? The property was developed, and the home was built under different code requirements. A new home can be built in compliance with the zoning ordinance but would require the removal of the existing basement, which is not as sustainable or practical as planned for a re-use of an existing structure. The conditions of nonconforming side yard setbacks present on the lot drive the need for a variance. The nonconforming foundation’s location is not self-created and not a result of the homeowner’s actions. Re-use of the foundation requires variance approval. Setbacks will not be reduced adjacent to side yards. Existing side yard setbacks will be maintained. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Granting the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The side yard setbacks of the new home will remain the same as existing with all other zoning requirements in compliance. The existing nonconforming side yard setbacks are similar to others along the block and in the vicinity. STAFF REPORT Page 5 Approval Approve the request for a 2.8-foot west and .3-foot east, side yard setback variance from the 10-foot requirement for a tear down/rebuild on an existing nonconforming foundation. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The practical difficulty is caused by the location of the existing nonconforming foundation. 2. The request is reasonable as it will utilize an existing foundation that is presumed compliant when built in the 1980’s. 3. The proposal is reasonable in that retaining the foundation is a practical and sustainable solution to constructing a new house on site. 4. There are circumstances that are unique to the subject property. Those unique circumstances include keeping the foundation which causes practical difficulties and conditions creating difficulty with compliance. The threshold has been met to classify the project as a new home, however, re- use of a solid precast spancrete foundation is both practical and sustainable. 5. The proposal would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. There are similarly sized buildings with nonconforming side yard setbacks along the block. Any approval is subject to the following conditions: Subject to plans and survey date stamped April15, 2024. A construction management plan for a new home building. Compliance with the tree ordinance. The exterior of the home must be floodproofed where the grade is less than 912.3. A stormwater management plan and final as-built survey are required. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit may be required, applicant will need to verify with the district. Denial Deny the request for a 2.8-foot west and .3-foot east, side yard setback variance from the 10-foot requirement to build a new home at 5416 Gove Street. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal does not meet the standards for variance. 2. Upon removal of the basement, there is no practical difficulty in complying with the ordinance for a new home. 3. When considering the property as a vacant lot, there are no unique circumstances present. 4. Granting the variance may alter the essential character of the neighborhood by continuing nonconforming setbacks for a two-story home replacing a single-story rambler. Staff Recommendation City staff has not been able to identify practical difficulties preventing reasonable use of the property as a vacant lot and cannot support the request given there are no unique circumstances with the plight of the petitioner self-created. STAFF REPORT Page 6 Staff recommends denial of the variance request for a 2.8-foot west and .3-foot east, side yard setback variance from the 10-foot requirement for a tear down/rebuild on an existing nonconforming foundation. Deadline for a City decision: June 14, 2024. © WSB & Associates 2013 5416 Grove Legend Parcels Parcels May 2, 2024 Map Powered By DataFi / 1 in = 53 ft DATE: 4/22/2024 TO: Cary Teague – Planning Director FROM: Ben Jore, PE – Senior Project Engineer RE: 5416 Grove St. - Variance Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility concerns, grading, stormwater, erosion and sediment control and for general adherence to the relevant ordinance sections. This review was performed at the request of the Planning Department; a more detailed review will be performed at the time of building permit application. Plans reviewed included an existing condition survey dated 3/13/1985, floorplans dated 1/22/24, and proposed conditions survey dated 4/12/2024 Summary of Work The applicant proposes to demo the existing home and construct a new home. The request is for a setback variance. Easements No comment. Grading and Drainage Site drains to the back low area where the runoff is collected by City storm sewer and eventually to Nine Mile Creek. Stormwater Mitigation A stormwater management plan has not been provided. The site drains to a structural flooding issue thus volume control is required. A stormwater management plan and final as-built survey are required. Floodplain Development The home is outside of the floodplain (910.3) and meets the 2’ freeboard standard as the existing LFE is 912.6. However the exterior of the addition appears to be at roughly elevation 911.5. The exterior of the home must be floodproofed where the grade is less than 912.3. Erosion and Sediment Control An erosion and sediment control plan was provided and no issues are anticipated. Street and Driveway Entrance No comment. Public Utilities Water and sanitary is served from the water main along Grove Street. Sump line not available for connection. Property must discharge sump to the street. Miscellaneous A Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit may be required, applicant will need to verify with the district. No well onsite per City records. Variance Application April 8th, 2024 5416 Grove Street, Edina, MN 55436. Project Details: The Remodeling of 5416 Grove Street dwelling aims to convert a one-story single-family home with two car garage into a two-story single-family home with three car garages. The existing home was constructed in 1984, confirming to the prevailing ordinances. We plan to retain the existing foundation while adding a small addition on the rear of the house. However, the addition of the third garage would require a new floor layout. The exterior walls cannot be saved, making it inevitable to tear it down to the foundation. The remodeled house would update the home to the current standards and add character to the neighborhood and provide much needed space for the growing family's needs. My wife, Michelle, along with our two daughters, moved into 5416 Grove Street, a quiet cul-de- sac, in November 2018. We have settled into this quiet neighborhood and love all the wonderful things this neighborhood offers. My wife works from home full-time and requires a dedicated office space. I need additional space to store my work-related products that I am required to test as part of my job requirement. Additionally, our children are growing fast, and we need more space for them. Given our changed circumstances, our existing home is too small to meet our needs, and this is the reason that we have decided to remodel our home. Furthermore, the current house is in dire need of updates. Therefore, we've chosen to work with the builder TJB homes and Remodelers to execute our home remodeling project. We will be keeping the existing foundation and build upon it. The current kitchen will be converted into a third garage and there will be a small addition on the rear of the house. The upper level will house the bedrooms. While the existing garage remains unchanged, there will be a 6-foot outcrop on top of the second garage as indicated in the exhibit. Due to the addition of the third garage, the existing floor system necessitates new supports, making it practically impossible to preserve 50% of the walls. Per city's guidelines tearing down more than 50% of the exterior walls would classify the project as new home construction and will be subject to the current zoning requirements. The current zoning requirements requires side yard setback to be 10 feet. Therefore, we are seeking a variance to maintain the side yard setback at the current level. While ensuring that the remodeled house complies with all other zoning regulations. CITY OF EDINA APR 0 8 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1 Variance Details: As the property owner, I respectfully request a variance for the side yard setbacks (both East and West sides) as outlined below. There will be no change in the footprint on either side. The house will be taller with the structure on the East side, while the West side will remain unchanged except for the change in shape of the garage roof. East Side Setback Required : 10.0 feet. Current : 9.7 feet Variance Requested : 0.3 feet (same as current) West Side Setback Required : 10.0 feet. Current : 7.2 feet Variance Requested : 2.8 feet (same as current) CITY OF EDINA APR 0 8 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2 CITY OF EDINA The Proposed Variance Will: APR 6 8 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMEN) Relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. The East side wall setback is not confirming by 0.3 feet. The reason for the non-conformance remains unclear. The original survey done before the existing home was constructed (see exhibit) shows a setback of 11.9 feet at the rear. The spacing between the adjacent buildings measures 20.5 feet which appears to be accurate. Moving the foundation to correct such a negligible discrepancy of 0.3 feet would be extreme and unreasonable. The West side wall setback is not confirming by 2.8 feet. The West Side wall supports the double garage, which has a workshop below it. The garage is supported by precast planks (spancrete) and it is practically not feasible to move the West side wall to comply with the current ordinance. Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. The proposed house will utilize the existing foundation. The quality of this foundation seems robust, showing no signs of cracks or water ingress. The garage will remain unchanged, except for a new roof. Due to the property's grading, the existing garage was excavated, and the lower space was transformed into a workshop. This uniqueness of the property makes it difficult to conform to new setback requirements while using the existing foundation. Be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. The remodeled house will be in harmony with the existing neighborhood homes, which have been renovated over the years. The side yard setbacks will be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Not alter the essential Character of a neighborhood. As depicted in the exhibit illustrating the building placement of adjacent homes, the proposed side yard setbacks and the remodeled home will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. This house has not undergone upgrades since its original construction in 1984. However, with this variance the proposed remodeled home will blend in and match other existing homes better and enhance the Character of the neighborhood. 3 k-, CITY OF EDINA APR i -; 2024 PLANNING DErjARTMENT 6 F 0 5 1 A 8 '4 0 8 O / / / / / / / / / / SF ASF ,Sc I COy SF - -912- / WKWAILmIll NA T 20 F LEGEND: Know what's below. Call before you dig. PROPERTY UNE CONTOUR PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION DRAINAGE DIRECTION STABILIZED CONST. ENTRANCE SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG - tf - SILT FENCE GRADING & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT NOTES: 1. Site survey with existing utilities provided by others; Contractor is responsible for identifying location of all utilities in field (which may not be shown), including contacting Gopher State One Call and ensuring utilities are located prior to digging. 2. See Certificate of Survey for additional existing utility and proposed building and lot dimension information. 3. Topsoil from grading areas shall be stripped, salvaged and stockpiled; subcut below final grade and replace salvaged topsoil to a minimum depth of 4". 4. Loosen compacted soils through raking, tilling or other methods to a depth of 6" (min.). 5. Unless noted otherwise, all proposed contours indicate finished grades. 6. Contractor is responsible for maintaining flow paths indicated, with roof runoff directed to the street as indicated. 7. All grading and erosion control shall adhere to City requirements. SEDIMENT CONTROL & TURF RESTORATION NOTES: 1. Perimeter sediment controls shall be installed as indicated prior to site disturbance, and shall be installed to allow for high-flow bypass or overflow to prevent failure during significant rainfall. Devices shall not back water up on adjacent properties. 2. Inlet protection shall be installed of City catch basins within 1 block of project site. 3. Contractor is responsible for keeping sediment from leaving the property, including vehicle tracking. Should sediment be tracked offsite onto adjacent street, Contractor shall sweep at the end of work day. 4. Install silt fence or sediment control log around any soil stockpiles that will be present for more than 7 days. 5. Devices shall be inspected weekly and after all rainfall events exceeding 1", and maintained as necessary to keep the intended functional condition. 6. Accumulated sediment shall be removed from sediment control devices when of device height has been reached. 7. After rough grading is completed, and topsoil spread, areas shall be seeded and blanketed or mulched (or sodded) as soon as practical or within 7 days. Areas not being actively worked must be covered with temporary seed within 14 days. 8. Perimeter sediment controls shall remain in place until vegetation is growing / established in all disturbed areas. POLLUTION PREVENTION NOTES: 1. Concrete washout shall not be permitted onsite, unless done per MPCA standard. 2. Vehicle or equipment washing will not be performed on site. 3. All solid waste must be disposed of in accordance with all applicable federal and state regulations. 4. All hazardous materials must be properly stored to prevent spills or leaks; dispose per all applicable regulations, including MN Rule Ch. 7045. 5. Pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, cleaners, paints, treatment chemicals, etc., must be stored under cover to prevent pollutant discharge (or similarly protected to prevent contact with stormwater). 6. DEWATERING, if necessary, shall be done in a manner so as to not discharge sediment-laden water or cause downstream nuisance conditions of standing water or erosion. 6.1. Discharge dewatering towards street. 6.2. Dewatering water shall be inspected for turbidity (cloudy with sediment); if present, filtration mechanism shall be installed at pump inlet and/or outlet to remove sediment. This may include pumping from a perforated barrel lined with a filter fabric, pumping to a sediment filter sack or temporary settling basin (lined dumpster, pit, etc.) with in-line Chitosan sock (or similar non-toxic flocculant) and discharge from the surface, or similar filtration mechanism approved by the City. 6.3. Dewatering must be done to MPCA standards. EROSION CONTROL SUPERVISOR: 1. PRIMARY: TOM BUDZYNSKI Ph: 763-780-2944 NOTE:. USE 6" SANDY (60% MIN) TOPSOIL FOR GRASS TRENCH, OR ROCK FOR ROCK SURFACE OR PLANTING BED. VEGETATION MAY NEED FREQUENT WATERING TO ESTABLISH ROOTS DUE TO SANDY SOIL. 9 08- - SCARIFY SUBGRADE 6" MIN., If CLAYS PRESENT, REPLACE 6" SUBGRADE WITH SAND 0 INFILTRATION TRENCH SECTION PUBLIC STREET RADIUS AS REQUIRED 3'x22'x2.5' DEEP ROCK INFILTRATION TRENCH. • 0 SURROUND W/SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG UNTIL CONSTRUCTION COMPLETE & TURF ESTABLISHED. TRENCH MAY BE MOVED OR RECONFIGURED PER OWNER PREFERENCE; PROVIDE 185 CUBIC FEET OF ROCK VOL (MIN) FOR RUNOFF STORAGE. • EXISTING HOUSE 12" MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3" TO 6" CRUSHED ROCK, CLEAR OR WASHED, OVER GEOTEXTILE FABRIC STEEL STUDDED 'T' POST 5ft MINIMUM LENGTH POSTS AT 6ft MAXIMUM SPACING GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, 36" WIDTH MACHINE SLICE 8"-12" DEPTH (PLUS 6" FLAP) AS REQUIRED 15' MIN. PLASTIC 'ZIP' TIES (50# TENSILE) LOCATED IN TOP 8" DIRECTION OF RUNOFF FLOW O STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 0 SILT FENCE - MACHINE SLICED 151 -919 PROP.' PORCH SILT FENCE ROCK CONSTRUCTION e) ENTRANCE APR 1 "..; 2024 • • t6- I 1 I I I I I I I EXISTING HOUSE (1) m BENCHMARK SEE SURVEY DOCUMENTATION At* Ti s III tT, te,fal•aard 30" MIN. PROP. SDWK. - ‘,/ • s • 922 t3,0POSED DECK - -91 2 - PROPOSED ADDITION EXISTING HOUSE PROPOSED ADDITION'', DEPRESS TRENCH SURFACE 2"-3" MIN. TO ENHANCE CAPTURE. SEE PLAN ELEVS. ASTM #67 AGGREGATE OR 0.5" CLEAR DRAINAGE ROCK. WASHED ROCK OR SANDY TOPSOIL W/ MINIMAL FINES (>60% COARSE SAND) 1.5"-3" DIA. CLEAN, WASHED AGGREGATE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, TYPE 1 (3733) (US 1 OONW, OR EQ) AROUND STORAGE ROCK • 99 „9„, 0 \ -- I / .--. ._ ..... / SITE DATA: 1. PROPERTY AREA: ±12,800 SF 2. EXISTING IMPERV.: ±2,902 SF 3. PROPOSED IMPERV.: ±3,448 SF 4. NET NEW IMPERVIOUS: +546 SF 5. NET NEW IMPERVIOUS TO N: +630 SF 6. NET NEW IMPERVIOUS TO S: -84 SF CIVIL METHODS, INC. P.O. Box 28038 St. Paul, MN 55128 0:763.210.5713 I www.civilmethods.com I HEREBY MIMI' THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICANCII, OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY HE OR LINDO1 MY DIRECT SLPERVISION THAT VI A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER DE lAWS OF TIE STATE. HIMESOIA. 04-12-2024 KENT E. BRANDER 44578 DATE / REVISION: 02-02-2024 PemS1 Sub Alai SO. 04-124024 ReAstd Per Comments. Penni Submit's! Set. DESIGNED. KEB ca/ALL 208 PEENED DMP SHEET No: CO1 PROJECT: PROJ. LOCATION 5416 GROVE STREET, EDINA, MN 55436 PROD. OWNER TJB HOMES, INC. 5416 GROVE STREEt SINIVFNT GRADING & SWPPP . ••••••• •••••••• ••• .0090110 ***II*** • • e • • • • '908- - - 30" MIN. DEPRESS TRENCH SURFACE 2"-3" MIN. TO ENHANCE CAPTURE. SEE PLAN ELEVS. ASTM #67 AGGREGATE OR 0.5" CLEAR DRAINAGE ROCK. WASHED ROCK OR SANDY TOPSOIL W/ MINIMAL FINES (>60% COARSE SAND) 1.5"-3" DIA. CLEAN, WASHED AGGREGATE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, TYPE 1 (3733) (US 100NW, OR ED) AROUND STORAGE ROCK SCARIFY SUBGRADE 6" MIN., If CLAYS PRESENT, REPLACE 6" SUBGRADE WITH SAND • 3'x22'x2,5' DEEP ROCK INFILTRATION TRENCH. ip0 SURROUND W/SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG UNTIL CONSTRUCTION COMPLETE & TURF ESTABUSHED. TRENCH MAY BE MOVED OR RECONFIGURED PER OWNER PREFERENCE; PROVIDE 185 CUBIC FEET OF ROCK VOL (MIN) FOR RUNOFF STORAGE. PUBLIC STREET AS REQUIRED 15' MIN. 12" MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3" TO 6" CRUSHED ROCK, CLEAR OR WASHED, OVER GEOTEXTILE FABRIC RADIUS AS REQUIRED • \ • • • . - SF • s'90 • N O STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PLASTIC 'ZIP' TIES (50# TENSILE) LOCATED IN TOP 8" z 1.1-1 0 CL Ui DIRECTION OF RUNOFF FLOW MACHINE SLICE 8"-12" DEPTH (PLUS 6" FLAP) GEOTEXTILE FABRIC, 36" WIDTH a ® SILT FENCE - MACHINE SLICED EXISTING HOUSE STEEL STUDDED 'T' POST 5ft MINIMUM LENGTH POSTS AT 6ft MAXIMUM SPACING SF SF 200 SF 00, SF • kdab I I - • • • • i§ 8- \ l'ROPOSED DECK _ - ' -912 PROPOSED N ADDITION • • • ROCK CONSTRUCTION 5 ENTRANCE PROPOSED ADDITION',, • • \ PROP. SDWK. EXISTING HOUSE -911 PROP. I PORCH • • APR 152024 • • "9 1\ CITY OF E INA EXISTING HOUSE PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOTE: USE 6" SANDY (60% MIN) TOPSOIL FOR GRASS TRENCH, OR ROCK FOR ROCK SURFACE OR PLANTING BEO. VEGETATION MAY NEED FREQUENT WATERING TO ESTABLISH ROOTS DUE TO SANDY SOIL. INFILTRATION TRENCH SECTION • • • • • • • • • • D 0 \ D ' - --909- / / / / / / _- -912/ / - <-/ 4 4,$ -927. •••••••••• 100.0.• 0.••••• ••••••• • • • • •11100.41 Know what's below. Call before you dig SITE DATA: 1. PROPERTY AREA: ±12,800 SF 2. EXISTING IMPERV.: ±2,902 SF 3. PROPOSED IMPERV.: ±3,448 SF 4. NET NEW IMPERVIOUS: +546 SF 5. NET NEW IMPERVIOUS TO N: +630 SF 6. NET NEW IMPERVIOUS TO S: -84 SF memo, KEN MEM KEN cmEr.EMEt OMP DATE / REVISION: CO.02.2024 Penn( Subs:Mel SN. 04-12.2024 Revised Per Comments. Penh &kennel ON. I tD T -21 Feel LEGEND: PROPERTY UNE CONTOUR egil° PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION DRAINAGE DIRECTION STABREED CONST. ENTRANCE SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG -U'- SILT FENCE GRADING & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT NOTES: 1. Site survey with existing utilities provided by others; Contractor is responsible for identifying location of all utilities in field (which may not be shown), including contacting Gopher State One Call and ensuring utilities are located prior to digging. 2. See Certificate of Survey for additional existing utility and proposed building and lot dimension information. 3. Topsoil from grading areas shall be stripped, salvaged and stockpiled; subcut below final grade and replace salvaged topsoil to a minimum depth of 4". 4. Loosen compacted soils through raking, tilling or other methods to a depth of 6" (min.). 5. Unless noted otherwise, all proposed contours indicate finished grades. 6. Contractor is responsible for maintaining flow paths indicated, with roof runoff directed to the street as indicated. 7. All grading and erosion control shall adhere to City requirements. SEDIMENT CONTROL & TURF RESTORATION NOTES: 1. Perimeter sediment controls shall be installed as indicated prior to site disturbance, and shall be installed to allow for high-flow bypass or overflow to prevent failure during significant rainfall. Devices shall not back water up on adjacent properties. 2. Inlet protection shall be installed at City catch basins within 1 block of project site. 3. Contractor is responsible for keeping sediment from leaving the property, including vehicle tracking. Should sediment be tracked offsite onto adjacent street, Contractor shall sweep at the end of work day. 4. Install silt fence or sediment control log around any soil stockpiles that will be present for more than 7 days. 5. Devices shall be inspected weekly and after all rainfall events exceeding 1", and maintained as necessary to keep the intended functional condition, 6. Accumulated sediment shall be removed from sediment control devices when of device height has been reached. 7. After rough grading is completed, and topsoil spread, areas shall be seeded and blanketed or mulched (or sodded) as soon as practical or within 7 days. Areas not being actively worked must be covered with temporary seed within 14 days. 8. Perimeter sediment controls shall remain in place until vegetation is growing / established in all disturbed areas. POLLUTION PREVENTION NOTES: 1. Concrete washout shall not be permitted onsite, unless done per MPCA standard. 2. Vehicle or equipment washing will not be performed on site, 3. All solid waste must be disposed of in accordance with all applicable federal and state regulations. 4. All hazardous materials must be properly stored to prevent spills or leaks; dispose per all applicable regulations, including MN Rule Ch. 7045. 5. Pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, cleaners, paints, treatment chemicals, etc., must be stored under cover to prevent pollutant discharge (or similarly protected to prevent contact with stormwater). 6. DEWATERING, if necessary, shall be done in a manner so as to not discharge sediment-laden water or cause downstream nuisance conditions of standing water or erosion. 6.1. Discharge dewatering towards street. 6.2. Dewatering water shall be inspected for turbidity (cloudy with sediment); if present, filtration mechanism shall be installed at pump inlet and/or outlet to remove sediment. This may include pumping from a perforated barrel lined with a filter fabric, pumping to a sediment filter sock or temporary settling basin (lined dumpster, pit, etc.) with in-line Chitosan sock (or similar non-toxic flocculent) and discharge from the surface, or similar filtration mechanism approved by the City. 6.3. Dewatering must be done to MPCA standards. EROSION CONTROL SUPERVISOR: 1. PRIMARY: TOM BUDZYNSKI Ph: 763-780-2944 BENCHMARK SEE SURVEY DOCUMENTATION CIVIL METHODS, INC. P.O. Box 28038 St. Paul, MN 55128 0:763.210.5713 I www.civilmethods.com 1 MEMET CERMET TNT MEM Pt" SIECIMCEMCM, M IIMPORT WAS PREMED EV ME OF UNDER MY DIRER MAMMON NO WV I AMA GMT LICENSED PROFESSIONAL HIGINEER UM. THE UWS OEM. STATE OF MENESOTA 04-12-2024 KENT E. BRANDER ua WV 44578 5416 GROVE STREET SWM PROJ. LOCAllON: 5416 GROVE STREET, EDINA, MN 55436 PROJ. OWNER TJB HOMES, INC. SHEET HO: CO1 PROJECT: GRADING & SWPPP 5, 0 TI BUILDING PERMIT SURVEY PROPERTY ADDRESS: 5416 GROVE STREET, EDINA, MN 55436 FOR: TJB HOMES, INC EXISTING FFE = 923.4 (EXISTING FOUNDATION TO REMAIN) PROPOSED ELEVATIONS PROPOSED FFE = 923.89 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 3 Block 1, SMABY ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota. .912- X912.1 •• ................. .... ...... , ..... .......... ... .9 1 ..... ....... ....... ................. . ................ .... ....... 909 ....... . "*X:910.1 .....908...... •.......... X 909.3 I II III I L_ \/I .................... 907.4 907.3 X-908.8 X 91.2.0 ... 911 ...-.X9:12.2 907.4 ... 910. ............. .. ................... 9071. ••909 . .................................... ............. X 912.4 00 908 .FNP0.51P-Uk)ER MUD ....................... ..... DITCH 909 WEST 411. INDLS 907.0 907.2 907.1 ICE ICE ICE 907.2 ICE x 911.1 907.1 X 908.1 908.4 X908.7 ICE PIPE-12" r I I III I I *I I I I I L 907.0 ICE NORTH 907.1 910.3 %. ICE 907.1 ICE 908 909 X 909.5 0 20 909.1 0 o0 0 \ 907.2 ICE ..................... . 907.2 X 910.6 ........... ICE _-< ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 20 ft. .••••••• ..•••••• ;es x908.9 _ x 908.1 1.........908.9 WILLOW-33 910.3%. 910.1 ••••• MAPLE-14 „.. X 910.4 CD 0 C O 'I- 6 0 O .. 912 • 3 ....... X 909.7 ......810-•........ .... 17): 0910.8 MAPLE-20 910..1 X .... • 910.3 910.3 911 910.2 ... 100r- 910.3 I)( 100r ...... • • 912.3 BIRCH-9 912.7 25.50 14.50 co PROPOSED ui DECK „ 912 0 11.50PR (poser) o ADDMON of 912.3 x 913 0 913.6 912.6 9.7 xwe • x 912.8 11`. • 9\6 .9\7 919,4 .-.5:g11411 921.7 x 920.6 18.0 • ..... 915.0 . 7111 . 24.0 EXISTING HOUSE CD irc -915.7 21.0 DOMING HOUSE 918 0 919- -.920 v 9 j8 919 9OB22.2 T.... ........... 15.3 920.9 PROPOSED ADDMONA FFE 923.416.7 22.0 cs, =921.8 9.0 ac PROP. I 2•0N PORCH 923.7 920.7 921.9 921.6 FFE 922.3 922.2 XCF 921.4" 922.0 922.3 921.8 921.9 X921.7 I 4 91.4 921.4x 4/4 921.3 x 921.8 920.9 921 4 x CEDAR-5 O O 921.0 Cs1 x 921.0 FND CAPPEDIP-BROKEN 921.2 920.9 • PROP. SDWK. O 4 0 924.3 4Drainage & Utility Easement (per 4C 9 2/ • O - - - - 921.1 plat) PINE-10 0 921.5 PINE-10 -I o I I FNDLS17006 ©E 208 921.7 OAK-22 80.00 WEST -LANDSCAPING- 921:2 .. "921.1 921.0 .... . .. ..... 921.2 920.6 920.4 TC TCCC 920.7 920.9 TCCC TC 920.7 SMH -IN V13.4 r-r- 1.." I I %I I-- I Ft' I-- I-- I I • "h.." • I I • I” - CITY OF ED APR i 5 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 920.6 921.0 TC TC LEGEND DENOTES SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE DENOTES TELEPHONE BOX DENOTES ELECTRIC METER/BOX DENOTES FIRE HYDRANT DENOTES EXISTING CONTOUR DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION DENOTES 100YR FLOOD (910.3) DENOTES PROPOSED RET. WALL DENOTES BITUMINOUS DENOTES CONCRETE DENOTES PAVERS BENCHMARK TNH=923.82 (NGVD29).. AREA CALCULATIONS TOTAL LOT = ±12,800 sf Exsiting House = ±1,745 sf Existing Driveway = ±559 sf Existing Pavers = ±238 sf Proposed Addition = ±325 sf Proposed Porch = ±51 sf Proposed Sidewalk = ±136 sf Proposed Deck = ±394 sf Building Coverage = ±18.3% m • X1 01 1.2 100,r 3,y0 Exterior basement wall below ground elevation calculation: Total proposed exterior basement wall perimeter = 226.83 Exterior basement wall below average grade = 117.99 Exterior basement wall above average grade = 108.84 Percent of exterior basement wall below grade = 52% NOTES - BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ON ASSUMED DATUM. - ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE ON NGVD29 DATUM. I hereby certify that this plan, survey or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Revised: 4-12-24 (perimeter calcs) Revised: 4-10-24 (perimeter calcs) Revised: 2-8-24 (add ohw) Revised: 2-2-24 (area calcs) Date: 01-09-24 Reg. No. 44655 JOB #24001 ACRE LAND SURVEYING Serving Twin Cities Metro area and beyond ff I I 763-238-6278 js.acrelandsurvey®gmail.com 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 110_ I71 112 113 0 4_ 115 116 117 118 119 120 OSHUA P. SCHNEIDER - ,roti. .4-;• 4 -rt..si..,44 • • T•T • CITY OF EDINA APR 0 8 2024 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 111111111111111111111111 1 1 1111111 71. r WAX KIN wir IVIL IMP LEFT ELEVATION 1/9- B E HAKE ZINO 9/4. WIG WM - ESE 1 111111 1111 7' IWEIE SCON We MP REAR ELEVATION RIGHT ELEVATION ME: 1/1f 1111111111111 11111111M1 "MIMI 1111111111111 • PROPOSED FfE 92321 .1.0 rner WARNING: THESE PUNS ARE THE CREATIVE IDEAS OF TLII3 HOMES, INC. ANY UNAUTHORIZED USE, REPRODUCTION OR COMING FOR USE ON A PIM OR NEW HOME IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. ANY VIOLATION WILL RESULT IN PROSECUTION TO THE FULLEST EXTENT AS ALLOYED BY LAW. 111111111 1111 1111 I 1 1 FRONT ELEVATION rje . r...o• 1,337 92 FT. INN RGO1 Gsg: P. h.t syn 1. 11,111 d osidrottn, ogolMels, lokr, in444n1 old onion rapid lo canna Go prod h ascedace 11111 Cm Om in** callbalkrok *or Nonnt• Yam cif elscnprry, 61 Mos Irak p 6441 tld kho rondo/ Mir •poio• rY TB Hso 1100 &kn. 9/ HE 1102 Ban, 111 54441 IN BAN Candor 11845 pig% chou4,64, wdkatime, 4/14kgkry- a4 n brig ...tat .q•,›.. 4d= 114.10.• PLEASE SIGN & RETURN THE OFFICE COPY, THANK YOU DA1E. 12-8-22 REVISIONS 4-20-23 1-22-24 XO 501 DRAM BY: .11 cow. wa. TJ13888 SHEET NO. 1 Cs herby ere M trekdl carepeor rastatis, her, reeme ed ernes Nue Is wine the prole Is meow rRh Owe peas, deep redeem and *sr doramsta Is one at a &epee Se pre ,u yr doe dal les proadat 6111.1106.1wi HWIllth3 RIC Mere St NE .02 Bobo, IN 55440 RN M1, Codraer 11246 Aociptiel ploy drainpopalcatkas. owl Mir ixteats are selloisolay ed ore herby meet IC-r Ir-r tr-r W-0' OW 1-1 1-3' 1-3' 1-11 VA' r 1 ' I /39211 r411. I I 1 II I J I 9 ii ii r ii tr-r I I 11-1 I .UNI12...42J_Nifit. IiI ET"-III W . -.-. . . my L *QUI _ _ 1-,,;; til , - I k -I E - 5.., „. :d = E.---: Eg 1:4. ,i. ii ....•.- .._-___ Fr I 1 1 1 I I _ J - Ti ===l1M=Sdral=1 rj...7 ='' f '=:=:' " -.1 9 , I Asa 49.4 :1: -1-, I o. ► i I (I i 02L 013. S HT. I 1 LI- --- ZOB • ii !iI iii I L 51 1 Ii r Cf MED II ••-•-•-• •-•-•-•-• • , - i. M r T. W N OF 1PN= OCT. HOCK %ELS, • 1 ." P k I 24111 CORO FM 1 . rra _ 1 I AA .-i Ira - - - 1 - rt 4 -1 F- LP UN -I-1 IL) I • 4 2141-1 -I- 1- --6- 4 . /,11 IM 1 '- 1-4' - 1-1 I - --,:-: .- -1 , 14 4 1 __I_ I 111; Iii 4 I-1- I - )1 L _ — DST. PRECAST . 1 -- —j4 rricr rii-TZ HVillizE 4 RAW • NO 1 + I A ! ; F: v j4 t I Ai I II 1 11 1 I I I I I II • $ I T 1 il 9 I I I I I -i- T .1 I L.1 Ire 3.-1 • IB J' LJ I I I I I 5-1011 II .ftri 1,1 1, 1 1 1 I I I I 2d I 21162 ti-r gab • - ,... - 1 IL ____- 11L L TM SP git 41;:* tug 1 •-•••-••••-•• •-•-•-• •-•-•-•-•-•-•-•-• ig I-7 I !I • *Irv/ L In HAMM MET HEIGHT II...443, Room C ••• 4 I 01-2TE I I I OS -01r" I / 4- ,.., • , I 1 1XIST. BASEMENT . PLAN 1 1 C , ve .1'4 On MOM ET:=7.3 / C.L// // i • NEMO WOW 003 RCM OWL TO LE WWI : 811e, TO WRIT ML ION & GO. 1120. Mt o AL MRS SET 0 0'4 UPL63 NORM CREME • le SILOS 10 BE LAO BASEMENT PLAN L_ rd2' SAO' 1-1 r 11-01' 21.-0' tf-t ir-r 11-4' 04 aid 4r_.• sCOLB 1/e . r-r 1,124 SO FE IOTALLd IL MY He CCL RW IS AE NM Cl NIL WARNING: THESE PLANS ARE THE CREATIVE IDEAS OF DB HOMES, INC. ANY UNAUTHORIZED USE, REPRODUCTION OR COPYING FOR USE ON A PLAN OR NEW HOME IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. ANY VIOLATION WLL RESULT IN PROSECUTION TO ME MAST WENT AS ALLOWED BY LAW. DAM 12-0-22 REVI22SION& 4-0-3 1-2-24 1-22-24 X0 III DRAM B'S ▪ 1,100. Or PLEASE SIGN & RETURN THE OFFICE COPY, THANK YOU 001311. NO. MOM SHEET NO. 2 IF • • NUM IRMO (PCO 11I RCM ORICS. 10 EC *RAD • PM 70 We ALM* DOOR !CO. MIL RR • r-I yr FIAIE W. LIM NOD 011111116E • NI MT If V4 Wins NOM MEE • N1 7103a 101E Limo FIRST FLOOR PLAN ocrie 1,107 90. FE Os — gm b larila a ccallnabao meta* Ida, **mot ad mica totted to coakvet Ea protat II madam At Elm Eara, Fob% spocklalkna and GEE downy& It ow at &noon IN pike yak go dont 611E0 rondo! lei. MO. R1110,11,11 41E Mb= IE .02 BMA 114 55440 NH BAN Cadadat (1016 actottoa - Lwe PIM, evoke, ipociacabot• sof Air itaaaltak ao atifoolay ma ars ha* acapbt *Om*. sPim. Datat•••14.1.0 imo PLEASE SIGN & RETURN THE OFFICE COPY, THANK YOU 2r-o• if-C tr-r tr-r r-r f- 14 1-,r r-tr VA' 30e001 STARS COFN X 0 OW i NEMO en I 17 iT g 13, 3 01 1.4 we F UL WM VP l'-' ?2 1-1 r le-.3* 4Cen 30000R ¨ . CPI( 494 r ---- r1-k WTI 11 LW i I 7 / I 1 I 11, ligeai / 1 i .1-1‘ Miff ME OuLDER /... ;;77777/7 X "it L 4ratiril -1] (-1. / fe-2* 1. ___ _ - fr-irtf 4- _i_i A,--1.... yl "C l* igalali 4gi e. e 411 i 'r V : 1 1 I !1 I Pri BOgI • a I!, 3 1-- 1-1- 1 t t t -11 -1-1 ei 1 illoi %ow Far. 1 LI V if-o• tri /- IR 1 F, /.77 ,7 . .1.6A L .IJ , It WW1 1., ___ EN _ _ RR UP I7R 1- IP t INE ROX MIME WWGE I. r-r 29,90. r-r lei WAIVE VW ! d 1 DM SPNICKIE WINCE rte! Rd OIL OIRME DOCK -iiiir fist MO OIL WAR 003R 1 1 .11" VP U eitea , I- 11===11 r r NFU 111..X.KON ea caw 11%4P tr-o• 14 r-r • r-tr t-a• r-1 r-r - r-r re-cf te-0* we 174 If- ae-cr Ord DAM 12-5-22 REVisONg 4-25-23 1-2-24 1-22-24 MG 101 DRAM et JR COMM. NO. TJB080 SHEET NO. 3 WARNING: THESE PLANS ARE NE CREATIVE IDEAS OF T,113 HOMES, INC. ANY UNAUTHORIZED USE, REPRODUCTION OR WANG FOR USE ON A PLAN OR NEW HOME IS S1RICILY FORBIDDEN. ANY VIOLATOR DU RESULT IN PROSECUTION TO 111E FULLEST EXTENT AS ALLOWED BY LAW. ••• WNIng2C° DOX ROOF 11-50 ISA. (tiul 1115131 Ie ROM 1IE65ES • itr (LC (3111LirtWIDIEW IS RCS JOSSES S we OA • 12 OA USA KISER S.NO • WM% 11 •••• MEM DM SST. 1•111•11 FOUIOATOI MINN =OM rt KE SHOD OR OWL IRE ft WIER SKID • /11. VALLEYS a ROOF MEMOS 10 HOE NI. OSIS v6, ORBS NO FINS 10 If Ws 6/ MAN PMOL MICR 70 SUP NOW 932 1103040 AT NL IFPCITT REDS A PONT LOSS 51INCUX LIST ORONO NSW ROOFMTK SOW UPS r-4 . L—J MEM IMMO 'RAY FO ON RN SL 10 MOS PRAY FON 161 SL 10 MOW 4r4 14.4 14*4 114 64 1/4 74 401671 ti 1P CT. TY to b I t/Pl_ 1 RHINO-Kg 48. 40XfX r-12 v ii ii II 2105 24 S 164 wtea - ul r 124 t •I ii u 2 i ii VI i 74. g 216e i II 5 V 11 Xi S F.O. 1U11 VMS. L litre' gM g to * t. gm 0 1 1 2 x Asa 2tsa 1 1117R ... 1 Or e r-e 24 4664 US iD k 2-10. e-e ,... w I 1 ts' t VP" ii F .O. X ti tr-r 4*- 3.- 124 i .. A 30540( 30101( DEUS ig .F" E i'..--i"_•".: EiZ-:EF--iF-.I:-.: aia-iii • 1 (-2 64 64 4r-e 14'4 • rd • • CROSS SEC110N "A" WM fir - e4 I 124 • • 'MOSS 240 SEM OMR • BURL TO 1f/IFY WE DKR OFt 1 S-1 ve itsw HT. SUSS WED OHM SECOND FLOOR PLAN id LDS DI Ft Vs Imnby woo to 4rw d cemendkoi mole* lM 1 ••••••14 ad woks ivtiool M ciaolisl Ow prolog 111 moles tili tam Pala ton* ipooncottnt ad Ohl, drao0041 In ono of Scopes Iso Os Pot op RHO did I procodoot il•hr 1041•4 TS Hinettoo DICO Soltimot el NE /102 SoHo, RN 55440 NI BAN Cooloolor #645 "icco•bid - ltais plot la*" opodiedko. ad OW icommit. orkkotay fad et hor06 scotod. 11../.. aero I11 14./0.• UPd•• PLEASE SIGN & RETURN THE OFFICE COPY, THANK YOU WARNING. THESE PLANS ARE THE CREATIVE IDEAS OF TM HOLIES, INC. ANY UNAUTHORIZED USE, REPRODUCTION OR COPYING FOR USE ON A PLAN OR NEW HOME IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. ANY VIOLATION WLL RESULT IN PROSECUTION TO THE FULLEST EXTENT AS All.OILED BY LAW. DATE: 12-6-22 RENSONS 4-26-23 1-2-24 1-22-24 XF )03 DRAM MI DOM HO TJEI666 SHEET NO. 4 ob DAM 12-6-22 REASONS 4-26-23 1-2-24 1-22-24 XF )03 761 II DRAM SY: COAL NO. 'WOW SINIT Na 5 EXIST. BASEMENT PLAN rALE: • Ils Why is Po MIA 40 ordziorom mdriHti lea, ogre.' it of oink* Noir Is couroN tho poIrt oorrimos proo. largo opurcorno *or d000rra h too of droopory. 4r pols opflur rat Ad Ifir propirt irr *O. or TM Hama* 9103 Moon SL 1E 1102 IN IN 5S140 104 Mai Carcdor 114645 M, oolfrwtory apted - INN pr, rorop, speciosa% Mair rumor 41 wo doortod. forlorropor Doerr our. Irr PLEASE SIGN & RETURN THE OFFICE COPY, THANK YOU WARNING: THESE PLANS ARE THE CREATIVE IDEAS OF TM HOMES, INC. ANY UNAUTHORIZED USE, REPRODUCTION OR COPYING FOR USE ON A PLAN OR NEW HOAIE IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. ANY VIOLATION WILL RESULT IN PROSECUTION TO THE FULLEST EXTENT AS ALLOWED BY LAW. PLAN REVIEW AND INSPECTION ISSUES Thhi M c4 bra may be Mad a Plai Wows aid &Ad* **Port He um00 o O lad NO s kr sifortim lamosto Eneho Oslo 19. Rim:** Ono & Otebbocies, am- Want* the Ws wares! a* "pH only to d4T .lied Imayisid bro-farily readmtil drib* PLAN RENEW ISSUES 113UNDATON MAD& 0 lookalas sal bake* R-10 marks Ma* O Waal* *Wks *ma tam the tap of the id dam to tap of the al 0 Ws loc * kusdatlai helot* la wowed bye *Ps** wail With OCINTRETE SI/8 OR 111001-14113 &SIAM O deb at erode paha. trot* R-5 nobbrone O deb Winds Han top of dab to dodo kat lb. or to of Meting 0 fan oar Waded mom R-30 *Arun MOONS / COOTS / SOLOITS O am(ps 11 add -sda ed land** allow) le 0.37 madmen he *Pow arid pow Wan iabt "an 0 *doer Um*. aindarnt Pal 1114dmik Roped 0 *dew ad dear am easiebat PM pat and Wawa &part IECHN4044. WIMPS ISM 0 roadentli mahankal *dation system prate*• alapate wad* pre code raphrmate O Woos raking I saidatel alti *We* eir buldhp deam pan O probates "pint 10.,64 dipmeirrhatIon I *Wed per eta requiromentit 05410PE MUS* FOR MI RENEW 0 Wider bows* halatiat 9-5 *rim* Of no eater* hould444 0 alb* lath Pt* R-50 or oemirlamt olth buldhp paned *dm* Roped 0 sal Pa*. rad Madatko Mal I eat*** .Rh basal dodo ad *eche* &mat INSPECIION ISSUES CONCEALED IMAM FRA*40 NO WINO O ltd par bar* Inialled at et* sape O IMIlliOr armor, Roof thd Inailatem am be held* alter staler shoat* le betel* O PitinatIone of Ka* awake ad Werke a* ae Paned mo that bwiathat oan bee Wald beam the partban sod Wilda shosthhy *a Werke awl*, le Waded O ppe *Man RsN, las Ma am-Palf rah are *ablated by *aria lopotlw a we hmkted ot the term ri ▪ d between crendltkinal aid malt** maw made per to Maim blepabas are NAP O *dew suet be hiekited a,6 sided at Imidatke !PERISH MI ENVER d We dope are dr steal 0 pipe 04,6.10 armi, appenet aid Ma and champ &rasp Mer Make * ban* are sealed O a mead ocatheaus beer * ban* *Wed en the yam Ws of the Ming enakpe at mai* vdt, and low dm 0 *Mr botibd tub aid Mow k Wed sod petated 0 mewl lad Mires a* iscial !MOPE MAIM 0 hairnet Wafts to 11-5 **run Otd ash bora at bemarallm house ad prop le emiled 0 Woe • hadolim I peseta Rae *tab; Ma eros O hisialka m *AM Molts sod a* armed In oft* le sweatedal the unocalanal do TRO Vox117ele pima *Pat* He 1-50 tar Nil Rod sod R-2I Irr vel peal 0 at* rima *MAW to Rail nos awes mathg 0 nothkatesi el Ma R-Mee cad date ci hatelle5:a posted tea Main permit **aka cad NOTE: 1. USE SEALED SUMP BASKET 2. INSTALL 6 MIL POLY UNDER SLAB LEAVE 6" ABOVE FLOOR FOR OVERLAP REEPONSOLITIOR 1. You ore temperable for odatry oar efferent bode of Ember and Werke mihrork re medal S. The DSO oder must be beethof ekes gbh any Noll rodranatte a the kcal tubing S. 11.1 Baht oonbooto oast be onVror' the Mambo 0.4 T171:1"'".*'"g= hb..... b"restaitr**M""t"'" Ot rAIllInt lthrift.°6"."'t4"WoPob9e1/4".:4441.'both."'""th• A AN daces old path, deco mot La she rand of a ebbe Inciathe LL Roof *Food mot be theballed lath albs od RYA hoe et Mot I/O. No** on rertIod pa* or ad. C. theory bloke to be bottled at El sorbed jobb no web 0. N puree root. trot hare roof rots Oh 1114 boo rote req t.a at the home I: N woos meet hthe 00111! tots. AN woo hoodoo aid Odor loran oat be aged In O. 446= is ere to ta, Iry Weird stet plywood and plod fee • ocelthuous taper bonier. H. N -waft cenneolthg to Werke axis rad Mater top plot* L Iener ft s ioL .... at t*ba . dtt , aortthrogtti*:ir lodsPar" h.d.L.ba"benter4 p meet ay A Noid elnd bole* neat be Metaled there eaRRo He IL r:Mdl=te bo Iodated prlor He being oared *it eseare .ith rlin b S i ame . and bottom., of L. Wto ▪ /5 *Noon aft mat be *Id M. The Etto met be kept dean at d boo end et the end ala =.ral sop met be blood In the donpoter. the must teem the boors cul at the end of orb des O. ts ay to be put at roof by the swans corpantre. P. N *Noe wood be wrapped Nth Widths pop.. by Vol ettootted *yarn elth poor ow los. CI tl i gato omen mud be sheathed elltt OS bard deco ueed. R. Al ek.s. oents mud be bath the awned wow - woe S KE St WATER NILO ALL VALETS IE At WATER MD le UP ALL WALLS 14 ROW RUNS AMINO WAIL • ALL IICIMEIN OR MID LEND DOLED 111R01)01 1111000 SINN MUST BE PRE-ONLLED NO SEALED W/ WOE TO MOOT WATER IMAM • ALL SUWCOITRACTORS WW1 NAL ALL PDIETRATIONS TO ROOM Of HOUSE WHEN ANY HMO ARE CUT OR MORMON ARE MOWED • FLASH ALL *DOM NO DOOM KICKOUT RAISIN TOE INSTAJJED Re roam T. COMMON VAPCS BAR ER AT ALL WALL PRAWN TO WIRER NO CO WV Of ALL TOP PIA10 TAPE ALL VAPOR MINERS. FOAM ALL SIVIT NID nap THAT POIETRAll weal wax 10All MOM ALL 040004 NO DOORS TO ATM. IL ALL CANWLOOS TO COMA OR INTO 0ARACE KIST IIE SEALED Vt/ 111EA1IDIO 041 fe MO TO BECW11:04RE' DiMill,C17175APER PRIOR TO EOM Andersen NFRC Certified Total Unit Performance Andersen. 200 Series .Casement Window (24" x 597) Arming Window (59"x 4") Tilt Wash Double-Hung Winder (47"1 59") Clear Dual Pane PER RAI ALL FIFE MS NO 11111145 10 1E SUEDE 1RAI04I04 COUFUNGS UN. XL RDI MONS seam. .90 IS law* 11103 Dalras 5. IE per Pa* IN C6440 *I Dad* Cabs* 0515 Acapted path drab* imakatlate. ead Or Maas* are valehday aid r. hariby exabit IISTNIUDEL REIM WWI RETUCIDI SYSTD) ON SE WIT PPE AT EACH UCH NO ACCESME MIMS 0103AS) ALL COORCI. EINTS, 0 11041 Alfa, C0EITAIC101.13MS. NO ANY OVER JCINIS IN COME ELMS SIWL a/1ED CALIK Cat &&A1 9: WAD SAP DM PER /1114 SEAL XL ANTS NL 1E41E01 EU.S FOU10. Ut IMMANA *vim beeillaaamem pm PLEASE SIGN & RETURN THE OFFICE COPY, THANK YOU 252 DRAW BY: dR COWL NO. mum $111CC4 / STONE ATTACHMENT to HMS, INC. CARPENTER'S CHECK UST ENERGY STAR' Qualification Helps Identify the Window and Door That Is Best For Each Climate Zone. Products that bear the ENERGY STAV logo roust meet stringent energy efficiency guidelines set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy. These guidelines are based on the heat gain and loss of each product in various regions of the country. 1. OW FOR SISFECTIO1 A VEY COWPDX MI PARR OCAPLEIE CIE*1071 KEA. zelnassammens. MAIER FICASTISE W$0140 GER ADM BASED KAHN 8011.11015E 2 LAWS OF OWE 0 PAMMOLE TITS IS at IM FELT IS NOT GRADE 0 IWER WRICAL MIS IN PARR 9WL EF UPPED AT LEAST 2 WOES E01515RAWENNOSILAM4. MAKS MINOS SAL 13E RASED. WE WHO WAVE ON MOWS TEL NT FE ACCIPED FOR HASHING KESS H IMNUFACTIERSIEWIATEN WIMENS ME PROM CP SE STORM H RANI IS ACCEPTNIE AS RASH* A 2120111.NNES. PAPER STALL LE INSTALLED Ca H DLITTOI NO SEES Cr MOW MITRE 061741110 100441 1141311211E 7* OF MOW SM. CO OAR If MOON RANK A SEM LAM OF PAPER KU FE MIMED OSER H ODE WOO/ FUMES 6 2111321SPEIES4 MAK OR THE MOW MRCS 70 NNW WIN W1105901. OUR CPOINGS 1515T EE GLIM ***WOOF. PAEEILINIKIELL: Mt VAT U AISTNITD 041E041w WU. 1011.11:040 WHIM SEIFFIT (RP** XL PAPER MUST U IKSOLLED SINE FAWN 70 MUM C411. 7. BUM 102(011 FLAW IS MULLED AT Ud1110D1IF IITERSECRONS WYE DE RV LINE DOES NOT 01300 PAST H WAIL. ODER MINOS SOIL DE RASED TO EWE 161 lEADERPROZ ICELX11111. A CCPPOSION FIESSTNIT War WEED MIH A MAI &RICA ATTACINENT RAISE CEJ 1/2' OM SOIL U PROADED AT St 11101/ H FOIAIDAION RAW. H SCIEED WIT U PLACED A *WM OF 4 NOES /DOW H MN at 2 INCHES NOTE =OWE NO SOIL LIE OF A TOE 1340 WU. MOW WM WWI 70 OWN NT H WOOL VEEP SCRUM MAY BE 46T MOW H HAM LIE at WAY EXIEND 0110H 100DA1101, PROWED SERE IS PATER ON HE FOUNTATIOS STIPX0 WIT 07431, OUT NOT EOM WOW H LAIN NO PAM PRCPERIT ACOE33 all LONER YAM POICSE/OEWTAGT IN00101)00/1 AMMER PHOE/OONTACT Northern fituL.uy North/Central Heath-1u Et. ebaolum ▪ South/Central cu,,uut; • Southern Mostly ▪ Alternative Criteria Allowed Product Type (NFRC Size) Glass Type 0-Factor. SHOP' Product Type (NFRC Size) Andersen. 400 Series SH ;Cl VT' Pies? (rte 0.61 0.57 0.61 Clear Dual Pane Clear Dual Pane with Grilles Clear Dual Pane Clear Dual Pane with Grilles Clear Dual Pane Clear Dual Pane with Grilles Low-E Low-E with Grilles (140 ) 0 a 0.59 0.45 0.55 0.47 0.E0 0.03 • 047 0150 0.30: 0.32 3 5 0.30 • 0.20 ) 0.28 0.54 0.29 0.49 0.29 0.30 0,30 • 0.27 0.28 0.40 0.45 028 I;.;;1 0.53 0.29 r 0.49 0.29 0:3O '0.29 027 0.28 0.21 r48 0.28 0.44 0.27 0 0.00 0.28 1 0.53 0.27 0.33 0.d0 5.30 020 0.54 0.28 1 • 0.48 0.5.3 :128 5.47 19 0.29 5.26 '7 5.4? ' 0.55 isd Low HP Low.E4 Sun id Lou-E4 Sun with (Ad... HP Low-E4 SmartSiin lift Lee ru4 SmartSun w/Golles. Casement Window (24" x 59") HP Low-E4 HP Low-Ea with G.ters HP Low-E4 Som HP Low-E4 Sun with HP Low-E4 SinartSua HP Loa-E4 SIllariS1111w/Greles HP Low-E4 HP Low-E4 with Grilles HP Low-Ed Sun HP Low-E4 Sun with G. Iles HP Low-E4 SmartSun HP Low-E4 SmartSun w/Cir hes Clear Dual Pane 0:17 0.61 Clear Dual Pane with Grilles r3.-17 J 0.57 Low-E. 0 30 3 33 0 56 Low.E with Grilles 0.31 0.29 0.55 0.411 9.63 9: Clear Dual Pane with Grilles 0.40 05/ 0.59 Low-E 0.28 .• 0.34 low-E with Grilles 3.28 0.30 0.52 tidoullue. Doubleillung Windo 147" x 59.) (59" x it n Clear Dual Pane ,Narroline. Transom Whin, (ne - 059") Casement/Ass ••• Picture WIndovi (47"x59"). • E 0.47 0.47 0.30 0.30 060 3.54 132 0.29 061 055 0.33 030 0.63 0.56 0 0.49 0.65 0.55 0.56 Clear Dual Pane with Grilles Low-E Low-E with Grilles coldIng (Hio' x 47") • MIL PDS CS Mg DUI/A1/344 015110117 PPE WM) HE Low- .64 HP Low-Ed was Gates HP Low.E4 Sun HP Low-E4 Sun with Grilles HP tow-E4 SmodiSun HP Low.E4 SmartSun yr/Grilles 0.30 • 0.31 0.30 . 3.35 0.29 0.30 .a. r , ffie,fte via FIR RAN 1 atiTL2141. ONEEA 1311 OF A FM 00115.1 I I WE OS OF lf WIT sum L j 4 LK &Mk CISTNICE 3r -rr INSULI N °DIET IN ATM 146E FM WY DE DOMED (N10312) Clear Dual Pane Clear Dual Pane with Grilles Low-E Low-E with Grilles .0.45. 0.45 0.28 - Pull-Frame Double-Hung Window (47" x 59") Fixed, Transom, Circle Top" Window (47" x 591 PER FIN 0.,i6 U.Y1 0.63 0.47 u.'.,? .0.55 0.29 0.32 0.55 G.31 0.-28 0.48 • 0.30 021) 0.30 0.31 0.73 0.48 0.29 2;1 0.50 0.30 0.10 0.44 Clear Dual Pane Clear Dual Pane with Galles Leo E Low-E with Grilles Low-E Sun Low-E Sun with Grilles low-E. SmartSun Low-E SinartSun with Grilles HP Lim -E4 HP Low-E4 voter Grilles HP Low-E4 Sun nr eE4 Sun with HP Low-E4 SmarEarm HP Low EA SmartSun se/Grilleo 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.29 Woodwrighr Fe II-Frame Picture Window (47° x 09") 1).31 I S 0.77 •20.• 9 • 044 5 (15 0 20 0.51 0 8 0.32 0.30 0.29 0.27 0.52 0 0.46 0.30 .3 , 6.4 0.30 PER PUN - Norrollne... Gliding Patio Door (79" x 79") ---11431/LL IA91. IENTIND (MN REDUC1131 513101) 0111111314 PPE AT UM FLOCS NO 11 ACCESSTIE ATMS (1/103.4.5) 0 HP Low-E4 HP Iso 14 with HP low-E4 Suri HP Low.E4 Sun en)Grilles HP Low-E4 SmartSun P Low-Ed SmartSun :u/Lnlles 0.28 1Wodwright. Full•Fra nie Transom Window (47" x 5'. 3 0.45 0.1; I 0. 0.45 ;0 0.29 i 050 0.30 0 _ , 0.49 • 0.29 ) 0.30 1 0.17 027 028 0.50 0.30 3.19 0. 0.45 (1.40 Gado 0.00 0.40 0 32 it 041 0.33 021 0.35 0.32 0.15 0.23 0.3-1 0.13 0.19 0.31 0.16 0.37 0.3.9 0.14 0.31 Clear Dual Parse Clear Dual Pane with Grilles low-E Low•E with Grilles Low.E Sun tow-E Sun with Grilles Low-E SinanSuri Low-E SmartSun with Gnlies PER PUN )1( Gliding Patio Door (79 " 091 HP Lew-Ed HP Lit-E4 With Grille; HP Low-E4 Sun 0.31 HP tamed Son with Gibes 0.3? HP Low- E4 SmartSun 0.30 HP Low.E4 SmartSun yr/chile,-6.3 i Woodwrighl, Insert ' Double.H wig Window (47" x 59") En Ns booty ripe le isnli al emansake meads Kam oppount ad einkee nued He onaut tl9 pojal h oranlesee Nee plit4 Rohm Ithalbobsth atd Mamma I also el I darammt the plos mirk tp aNd thal We precede* Clear Duel Pane Clear Dual Pane with Grilles Low-E Low-E with Grilles _ Low-E Sun Low -E Sun with Grilles Low-E SinartSun Low -E SmartSun with Galles PER PUN 157115771,773,337, eye 333,35 015,39 •. tHigb-Pertiernme Limos- h00.140 Smt)," tee d los.140 SesS tit-etc:v.013i 1 U•factee Mires the - • 001.41:7 sq l 1713 tie odes emthot threpwed •::.: u=4 forstscito etilorms-sseite. is• • S,J3111,at ratistim 30, '.,-linredbr • etserbsd 3•3: ,,,,,,,,,,, • 110 7331 01737.350531107....- arks eitt. •577 157711e 3 1/,5b77 1 3 . 551315 ' Hinged Patio Door (39" x 79") th brad el DATE: 12-8-22 REVISION& 4-26-23 1-2-24 1-22-24 SF 00 131 :111177 7117g an tsit 61.1 1. r73.7f,57.71, ens dila is esserels as of Itssorritem: '-Tees, bedrisii ted reteeS " •, • redo reems.• t.• s • , 5373,m1,1 01 114E 11L CRSLL MOM UNWED KW S4111. EE TWO 12' NO PLACED Ma DE SLAB NO EN EP CIF 4' IN Sin GAS 143111EA5E LAMB 11 I L TJ PERFORMED CWA1 TEE Wa.zR Mar Roof 11001 (1'-1 tit) INSET ACCIRECAW pASS1VE RADON DETAL MME 1/4' • 1-e WARNING: 'MESE PLANS ARE THE CREME IDEAS OF DB HOMES, INC. ANY UNAUTHORIZED USE, REPRODUCTION OR COPYING FOR USE ON A PLAN OR NEW HOME IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. ANY MOUTON WU. RESULT IN PROSECUTION TO THE FULLEST EXTENT AS ALLOWED BY LAW. PUN SAWED LOUR WITHAM TM( POT ozolice SEP IS OF If Sal IL STAE SDG OXIE SHEET NO 5 AIN AOM 91,11131S 3108,41 / OM 'MUM 31021VH 1 1 DEW DOM 1 1 1 1111111111 IN3LALEIV634 ONINNVid tZ0Z 8 0 2:18V VNICI3 30 Allo 1111 II) ullr 1 11 1 1 1 1111 1111 I 11 1 1 1111 I I I I I I I 111 i 1 t 1 111111111111 111111111111 1111111111111 111111111111 1111111111111 111111111111 111111111111 1111111M1 MIN MOM 1111111111111 111111111111 1111111111111 1111111111111 SOcIONc:1 1GgM Roos 9NIIGIX; I 11 It 111111111111111111111 11 1111111111 -"Ai %Arms. 1141.11111101.1PUIP.O. 1 1 I III 1 1 11.1.1 1 1111111)11 1 11 tII 11 1 I JIl 11 1111 EXISTING NORTH EAST PROPOSED HARDIE SIDING w/4* WOW. WRAP 7" HARDIE SIDING I w/4" WDW. WRAP GAS F.P. VENT -- 7" HARDIE SIDING w/4 WOW. WRAP Street Elevation Existing House Proposed House 5410 Grove St 5416 Grove St 5424 Grove St Adjacent Property Setbacks 20.5' 5424 Grove St Proposed 5416 Grove St 5410 Grove St 9.7' 7.2' M II II II II II EMI M1E] I MIMI EMU I I-II I-II IIIIIIMM 1111011111 IMIIINI IMIIINI s te• r, • RON KRUEGER & ASSOCIATES INC. REGISTERED LAND SURVEYORS 7382 WASHINGTON AVENUE SO. EDEN PRAIRIE. MINN. 55344 PHONE 012-941.3030 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Survey for A NO RON 'CONCEPT APPROVE-D Date3 -zf-Ss 80. 'Job No. '7o/e, j Bk.40 Pg. 7.0V4 /1 yer;i* TER City of Edina Bldg. Dept. Pj7li. a0. V -0 8 1 11: LOT AlZ EA - /0600 6Q. F7 171011.E /71S 5QF7.- oac-1 zzo /07: ri 5‘41-7 = 7a ToTA z- /8/ 562.F7: ,cov6gAGg = /4. c/c> 0 • e.""..*.4.71,.. 4<ir • ("<-. we `°./ .04 4.c.7 45/ e."-r 7 Aefizy r c ./te.9PJ., C` 1ft‹04.31 4'14 I ,FV- 414* pgyv Nc/ 7 422 SCALE 1'f=W` 0206) k RROROSED 041. 4AA kt,t64 ei /6 CI 67 . 7.40 tit IN; /15.33 1172 zz-e' (92o.€ 1114,(92o 13) I 111.3 Pa1t 1 < .0) ,1-- - I 24. 11 4 Ki Z trt ,a4, FRoP0SEP ELEVA770 ,.J Loki/657 pa:0x ,- GARAGE Ft.r,cfz- 4920. 8 71PP cam' FouNOA770N- 92 I. xxX- )(1577N ELEVATION (xxx) a PIRC)P06 D Et-a W4770N (iiP) sr EX1.577IV AND Pfz44:19SEE ELEVA'77 0N . ("1 of SURFACE DRAINA EP e /6,47 t-536 gjea/ le,-71. / 14/ /re" e 75- 1 ,7/1 zvav 51 tip 920 .4 te77 3, 8LocK MARcd 19 • -- ,Eci 41;1- r:op SAM M.14 . e 4.4 . - 1202 1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of 3MA By A DOITION 14E lvN • County. Minnesota. Surveyed bygce-irtl /324-4 d r ,, 14/714.0, 4/ LIS RON KRU &EGER ASSOCIATES, INC. / STATE REG. NO. 14374 1 le y IC/174 /I e;71riciSt- 7*/ l.s eiertir,ic of (A/$ 1:4 Topics 1. Home Side yard setback 2. Reason of using existing foundation / Practical difficulty in complying with new home ordinance. Nelson Sequeira May 8th, 2024 1. Home Side yard setback Property Pictures :West Side Looking South Towards the Rear Yard Looking North Towards the Street 5416 Grove St 5416 Grove St Adjacent Property distance : 15.5’ Side Yard Setback of 7.2’ on the West Side will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood Looking South Towards the Rear Yard Looking North Towards the Street 5416 Grove St 5416 Grove St Side Yard Setback of 9.7’ on the East Side will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood Property Pictures :East Side Adjacent Property distance : 20.5’ •There is sufficient spacing between adjacent homes. •Similar size Homes in this block have non confirming setbacks. •On the West Side, there is no change to the existing garage, so there is no reason to be concerned about the building being too tall •Adjacent neighbors are supportive of the project and have absolutely no issues. 2. Reason for using Existing Foundation Existing Foundation Retain existing foundation •The existing foundation is of great quality •The home has a higher basement height than typical homes do. Foundation Basement Plan 175 Linear Feet of 8” X 10 Feet High Block Wall (Equivalent Concrete wall to be poured if foundation removed ) 520 sq feet Spancrete Garage floor Property cannot be considered as a Vacant Lot as the Foundation has got Inherent Value Concrete planks are supported by walls re-enforced by steel rods (Moving the foundation walls means an all-new foundation) •Spancrete garage floor. •Basement walls are structurally sound and sustainable. •The existing foundation has enough value and is worth retaining. •It would be illogical to remove the existing foundation and rebuild a similar home with a new foundation. A 2.8-foot west and .3-foot east side yard setback variance request to re-use a nonconforming foundation5416 Grove Street Site location Site location Front photo Existing floor plans Proposed survey Elevations Basement plan 1stfloor plan 2ndfloor plan Existing and proposed S/W elevations Existing and proposed N/E elevations Compliance Table Rendering Property side yard setbacks Findings for approval1.The practical difficulty is caused by the location of the existing nonconforming foundation.2.The request is reasonable as it will utilize an existing foundation that was presumed compliant when built in the 1980’s.3.The proposal is reasonable in that retaining the foundation is a practical and sustainable solution to constructing a new house on site.4.There are circumstances that are unique to the subject property. The threshold has been met to classify the project as a new home, however, re-use of a solid precast spancrete foundation is both practical and sustainable.5.The proposal would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. There are similarly sized buildings with nonconforming side yard setbacks along the block. Denial findings:1.The proposal does not meet the standards for variance for a new home on a 12,800 sq ft vacant lot.2.Upon removal of the basement, there is no practical difficulty in complying with the ordinance for a new home.3.When considering the property as a vacant lot, there are no unique circumstances present in support of variances from required 10-foot side yard setbacks. 4.Granting the variance may alter the essential character of the neighborhood by continuing nonconforming, closer setbacks than currently allowed for a new two-story home that is replacing a 1 story rambler. 5.Re-building a new home with nonconforming setbacks removes opportunity to bring the property into compliance. Grading and SWMP BTE Report Date: May 8, 2024 Agenda Item #: VI I I.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Addis on Lewis, C ommunity Development C oordinator Item Activity: Subject:Linc oln and Londonderry S mall Area P lan Working G roup C hair S elec tion Ac tion C ITY O F E D IN A 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov A C TI O N R EQ U ES TED: S elect one member of the Commission to serve as C hair of the Lincoln and L ondonderry Small Area P lan Working Group. T he other two current P lanning C ommission members selected for the Working G roup would remain. I N TR O D U C TI O N: On December 13, 2023, the P lanning Commission selected C ommissioners M iranda, Felt and D aye to serve as C o-chairs of the Lincoln and L ondonderry Small Area P lan Work G roup. After further review of the City's B oard and Commission guidelines, there should only be one member of the Commission serving as C hair. Other members of the C ommission may still serve on the Working G roup as long as the number of Commissioners is less than a quorum. T he C hair may nominate a Co-chair who is not a member of the Commission. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Working Group Members hip & Guidelines Page | 21 8.4 Membership & Guidelines. BOARDS & COMMISSIONS Membership • Members are selected by City Council. • Membership consists of regular and student members. • All appointments have term limits. • Subject to Open Meeting Law • The City Manager appoints a staff liaison who provides administrative support to the board/commission as a body. Guidelines: • Boards and commissions are established to advise the City Council • Establishment and missions are outlined in City code • Boards and commissions are on-going • Meetings of boards and commissions are public meetings • Commissions can establish committees and working groups COMMITTEES Membership • The commission selects at least two, but less than a quorum of members • All members must be members of the commission • The commission selects a temporary Committee Chair • The committee elects their own chair and notifies the Commission • Not subject to Open Meeting Law Guidelines: • Committees are established with the approval of the commission to assist with a work plan initiative • The commission has final recommendations on all matters which the committee has been given guidance • Staff does not provide support to committees • Meetings of Committees are not public meetings WORKING GROUPS Membership • A Working Group is comprised of one or more members of the Board/Commission, but less than a quorum of members and includes members of the public. • Commission selects the Working Group Chair. • The working group chair will recommend to the commission other working group members who are outside of the Board/Commission. The board/commission appoints additional working group members. • The Chair may also nominate a co-chair who is not a board/commission member. • Not subject to Open Meeting Law Guidelines: • Established with the approval of the commission • Created when work requires more support • Set timeline • Notice is given to the public of the formation of the working group providing a minimum of 14 days for the public to express interest before members are selected. • Commission has final recommendations on all matters of the working group • Staff liaison does not support working group • Meetings of working groups are not legally required to be public.