Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-06-23 Planning Commission Regular Meeting PacketAgenda Plan n ing Com m ission City Of Edina, Minnesota VIRTUAL MEETING Wednesday, June 23, 2021 7:00 PM Watch the meeting on cable TV or at EdinaMN.gov/LiveMeetings or Facebook.com/EdinaMN. To participate in Public Hearings: Call 800-374-0221. Enter Conference ID 8289182. Give the operator your name, street address and telephone number. Press *1 on your telephone keypad when you would like to get in the queue to speak. A City sta: member will introduce you when it is your turn. I.Call To Order II.Roll Call III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes A.Minutes: Planning Commission June 9, 2021 V.Public Hearings A.CONTINUE TO JULY 14, 2021: B-21-17 Front yard setback variance 5404 Stauder Circle B.B-21-19: Sign Variance to allow an additional 38.2 square foot building sign at The Bower, 3650 Hazelton Road C.B-21-18: A 2.33-foot height variance to allow for a new 20' 4" detached garage at 4628 Bruce Avenue D.PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit with Variances – 6200 Interlachen Boulevard VI.Chair And Member Comments VII.Sta@ Comments VIII.Adjournment The City of Edina wants all res idents to be c om fortable being part of the public proc ess . If you need as sistance in the way of hearing ampliBc ation, an interpreter, large-print documents or s om ething els e, pleas e c all 952-927-8861 72 hours in advanc e of the m eeting. Date: June 23, 2021 Agenda Item #: I V.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: Minutes F rom:Liz O ls on, Administrative S upport S pecialist Item Activity: Subject:Minutes : P lanning C ommis s ion June 9, 2021 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 the minutes from the J une 9, 2021 P lanning C ommission. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description Draft Minutes June 9, 2021 Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 1 of 3 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Planning Commission VIRTUAL MEETING June 9, 2021 I. Call To Order Chair Nemerov called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. II. Roll Call Answering the roll call were: Commissioners Miranda, Berube, Strauss, Bennett, Olsen, Agnew, Bartling, Alkire and Chair Nemerov. Staff Present: Cary Teague, Community Development Director, Emily Bodeker, Assistant Planner, and Liz Olson, Administrative Support Specialist. Absent from the roll call: Commissioner Cullen. III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Chair Nemerov indicated he would like to add Planning Commission Guidelines for discussion. Commissioner Berube moved to approve the June 9, 2021, agenda. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Bennett arrived at 7:03 p.m. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes A. Minutes: Planning Commission, May 26, 2021 Commissioner Strauss moved to approve the May 26, 2021, meeting minutes. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. V. Community Comment None. VI. Public Hearings A. Continue to June 23, 2021: B-21-17 Front Yard Setback Variance – 5404 Stauder Circle Director Teague indicated this item is to be continued to the June 23, 2021 Planning Commission meeting. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 2 of 3 Motion Commissioner Berube moved that the Planning Commission continue this item to the June 23, 2021 meeting. Commissioner Alkire seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. B. B-21-15, Front Yard and Rear Yard Setback Variances – 4241 Valley View Road Assistant City Planner Bodeker presented the request for front yard and rear yard setback variances . Staff recommends approval of the front yard and rear yard setback variances at 4241 Valley View Road, as requested subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. The Commission asked questions of staff. Appearing for the Applicant Mr. Paul Abdo, Owner and applicant, and Ms. Anna Devolis and Mr. Evan Hall addressed the Commission and answered questions. Public Hearing Ms. Jennifer Henneman, 6225 Brookview, introduced herself and indicated she was not in favor of the setback variances. Commissioner Berube moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Agnew seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. The Commission started deliberation and discussion. Staff and the applicants answered Commission questions. Video of the meeting is available on the City website for review of detailed comments. Motion Commissioner Bennett moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the Front Yard and Rear Yard Setback Variance as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Commissioner Alkire seconded the motion. Motion carried 7 ayes, 2 nays (Agnew, Bartling). VII. Reports/Recommendations The Commission concluded they would discuss the Planning Commission Guidelines and the Cahill Industrial Area Small Area Plan at their June 23rd work session. VIII. Chair and Member Comments Received. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: ___, 2021 Page 3 of 3 IX. Staff Comments Received X. Adjournment Commissioner Bartling moved to adjourn the June 9, 2021, Meeting of the Edina Planning Commission at 8:57 PM. Commissioner Berube seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Date: June 23, 2021 Agenda Item #: V.A. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Kris Aaker, Assistant P lanner Item Activity: Subject:C O NT I NUE TO J ULY 14, 2021: B-21-17 F ront yard s etbac k variance 5404 S tauder C ircle 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: C ontinue the public hearing to June 23, 2021. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he applicant is requesting a 36-foot front yard setback variance for 5404 Stauder C ircle to design a new home to replace in approximately the same location as the existing nonconforming one-story, single-family dwelling that was built in 1951. T he proposed project will be one-story, single-family home. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Site Location Narrative Survey Plans Ed ina, Hennep in, MetroG IS, Edin a, Henn epin , MetroGIS | © WSB & Associates2013, © WSB & Associa tes 2013 5404 S tauder Circle May 24, 2 021 1 in = 188 f t / CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT May 7, 2021 VARIANCE APPLICATION 5404 Stauder Circle, Edina, MN 55436 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND VARIANCE REQUEST PKA Architecture is working with the owners of 5404 Stauder Circle to design a new home to replace an existing one-story, single-family dwelling that was built in 1951. The proposed project would also be one-story, single-family home. Designed to be inviting and unassuming from the street side, the home will be nestled into the existing hillside and open towards the lake and existing prominent oaks with a walk-out and outdoor space at the lower level. The design allows for both levels of the home to enjoy ample sunlight, wonderful views the surrounding landscape and access to outdoor amenities. With an eye towards retiring in the near-future, the homeowners are excited to start their next chapter in this home and the neighborhood. The existing house is one of only three dwellings on Stauder Circle, so the front setback requirement for 5404 Stauder is the average front setback of the other two dwellings. The front setback of 5408 Stauder is 156'-2" and the front setback of 5416 Stauder is 75'-7 3/8", resulting in an average setback of 115'-11". The existing dwelling on 5404 Stauder is set back 79'-3/8", which is less than the average setback, so the existing front setback is legally nonconforming. The buildable area of the lot is also impacted by a 50-foot setback from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) line of Lake Harmony, which runs along the rear of the lot, and the 100-year floodplain. On behalf of the homeowners, we are requesting a variance to reduce the 115-foot front setback requirement to 79 feet to allow the minimum setback of the new home to be the same as that of the existing structure. As described below, the proposed variance is needed due to practical difficulties because of unique circumstances related to the property and will be consistent with the intent of the setback ordinance and preserve the essential character of the neighborhood. REQUIRED FINDINGS The proposed variance will relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. The proposed single-family home is a reasonable use of the property and a permitted use in the R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District. The proposed 79-foot front setback substantially exceeds the general 30-foot front setback requirement of the R-1 District. Allowing a reduced front yard setback that matches the setback of the existing house is reasonable, particularly PKA. ARCHITECTURE I WWW.PKARCH.COM I #1 612-353-4020I 2919 JAMES AVE S, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55408 because the majority of the new dwelling will be set back further from the street than is the existing structure and because it will be set back slightly further than one of the houses (5416 Stauder) that establishes the increased front setback requirement based on averaging. The proposed setback will relieve practical difficulties in complying with the special setback requirement based on the "average front street setback of all other dwelling units on the same side of that street, between intersections," which for this lot, increases the required front setback from 30 feet to 115 feet. In addition to complying with the general 25-foot rear setback requirement of the R-1 District, the property is also subject to a 50-foot setback from the OHW of Lake Harmony at the rear of the property. The combination of the increased front setback and the setback from the OHW significantly compresses the area on the lot that meets all setback requirements. The elevation of the 100-year floodplain and the topography of the lot, which slopes down toward the pond, also impact the site design and placement of the house and other structures. These circumstances create practical difficulty in keeping the lowest level of all structures at least 2 feet above the 100-year flood elevation because, as the siting of the house and terrace area is pushed further toward the rear of the lot, more fill is required to maintain that minimum elevation. In addition to the impracticality of a design that requires substantial fill, there is concern that the extension of fill toward the rear and south sides of the lot could adversely impact two, large heritage oak trees. The proposed variance will correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. This "block face" along Stauder Circle is unusual because it comprises only three dwellings, including the proposed new house, resulting in the "average" setback requirement being determined by only two houses. In addition, one of those houses (5408 Stauder) has an extraordinarily large front setback of 156'-2" (see attached graphics). The resulting average setback of 115 feet is extraordinary. The combination of an exceptionally large front setback requirement, a 50-foot OHW setback and a 100-year floodplain all affecting the same lot and reducing the buildable area from both front and rear lot lines are extraordinary circumstances applicable to 5404 Stauder that are not applicable to other property in the vicinity and rarely, if at all, applicable to other property in the zoning district. The proposed variance will be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. The general purpose and intent of the ordinance establishing a special front setback requirement based on the average setback of other houses on a block face is to require new construction to have a front setback that is similar to the established character of development. Allowing the minimum front setback of the new house to be the same as the 79- foot setback of the existing house will maintain the established character of development along this block face. In general, the front setback of the new house will be more in conformance with the average setback because the majority of the new structure will be set back at least 115 feet. In comparison, most of the existing house is much less than 115 feet from the street. The proposed front setbacks of the new house will be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 2021 2 of 3 PKA. ARCHITECTURE I WWW.PKARCH COM I +1 612-353-49201 2919 JAMES AVE S, MINNIEAFKANMING4DE PA R TM EN T As shown on the exhibit illustrating the building placement of homes in the surrounding area, the existing and proposed 79-foot setback of 5404 Stauder is consistent with the vast majority of front setbacks in the neighborhood. The structure that diverges most from the general character is the neighboring house at 5408 Stauder, the house with the extraordinarily deep front setback that results in the 115-foot setback requirement for 5404 Stauder. Nevertheless, the proposed setback for the new home relates to its neighbor by setting the majority of the front façade at or greater than 115 feet from the street. The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 3 of 3 PKA. ARCHITECTURE I WWW.PKARCH.COM I *1 612-353-49201 2919 JAMES AVE S, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55408 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT NIS PLAN, SPEER-ICON OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY NE OR UNDER Sly DIRECT SIPERNSION MD THAT I AM A DULY REOSTERED PROFES9ONAL COAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF 14NNESOTA LICENSE NO. MAY 4, 2021 DATE: PROPOSEI? POOL. (16540') t(WATER ELEY.L91L75) DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE SCALE - 1" = 20' 0 20 40 • • • • • 11 GRADING & EROSION CONTROL NOTES: BEFORE DEMOLITION AND GRADING BEGIN • Install silt fence/bio roll around the perimeter of the construction area. • Sediment control measures must remain in place until final stabilization has been established and then shall be removed. Sediment controls may be removed to accommodate short term construction activity but must be replaced before the next rain. • A temporary rock constnrction entrance shall be established at each access point to the site and a 6 inch layer of I to 2 inch rock extending at least 50 feet from the street into the site and shall be underlain with permeable geotextile fabric. The entrance shall be maintained during construction by top dressing or washing to prevent tracking or flow of sediments onto public streets, walks or alleys. Potential entrances that arc not so protected shall be closed by fencing to prevent unprotected exit from the site. Contractor shall install inlet protection on all existing storm sewer inlets in accordance with the city standard details. Inlet protection shall also be provided on all proposed storm sewer inlets immediately following construction of the inlet_ Inlet protection must be installed in a manner that will not impound water for extended periods of time or in a manner that presents a hazard to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. DURING CONSTRUCTION: • When dirt stockpiles have been created, a double row of silt fence shall be placed to prevent escape of sediment laden runoff and lithe piles or other disturbed areas arc to remain in place for mom than 14 days, they shall be seeded with Minnesota Department of Transportation Seed Mixture 22-111 at 100 lb/acre followed by covering with spray mulch. • A dtunpster shall be placed on the site for prompt disposal of construction debris. These dumpsters shall be serviced regularly to prevent overflowing and blowing onto adjacent properties. Disposal of solid wastes from the site shall in accordance with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requirements. • A separate container shall be placed for disposal of hazardous waste. Hazardous wastes shall be disposed of in accordance with MPCA requirements. • Concrete truck washout shall be in the plastic lined ditch and dispose of washings as solid waste. • Sediment control devices shall be regularly inspected and after major rainfall events and shall be cleaned and repaired as necessary to provide downstream protection. • Streets and other public ways shall be inspected daily and if litter or soils has been deposited it shall promptly be removed. • If necessary, vehicles, that have mud on their wheels, shall be cleaned before exiting the site in the rock entrance areas. • Moisture shall be applied to disturbed areas to control dust as needed. • Portable toilet facilities shall be placed on site for use by workers and shall be properly maintained. • Hit becomes necessary to pump the excavation during construction, pump discharge shall be into the stockpile areas so that the double silt fence around these areas can filter the water before it leaves the site. • Temporary erosion control shall be installed no later than 14 days after the site is first disturbed and shall consist of broadcast seeding with Minnesota Department of Transportation Seed Mixture 22-111 at 100 lb/acre followed by covering with spray mulch. • Erosion control measures shown on the erosion control plan arc the absolute minimum. The contractor shall install temporary earth dikes, sediment traps or basins and additional silt fencing as deemed necessary to control erosion. SITE WORK COMPLETION: • When final grading has been completed but before placement of seed or sod an "as built" survey shall be done per City of Edina requirements to insure that grading was properly done. • When any remedial grading has been completed, sod or seeding shall be completed including any erosion control blankets for steep areas. • When turf is established, silt fence and inlet protection and other erosion control devices shall be disposed of and adjacent streets, alleys and walks shall be cleaned as needed to deliver a site that is erosion resistant and clean. • Contractor shall maintain positive drainage of a minimum 2% slope assay from proposed building. (EXISTING HOME FIRST FLOOR = 923.80) EXISTING ELEVATIONS PROPOSED ELEVATIONS FIRST FLOOR (SUB-FLOOR) = 922.50 TOP OF FOUNDATION = 922.25 BASEMENT FLOOR = 912.25 GARAGE FLOOR = 922.00 AVERAGE EXISTING ELEVATION AT FRONT OF PROPOSED HOME = 920.5 917.7 \ INSTALL SILT FENCE 4917.0 Benchmark: • Top of manhole 917.4 PLANT TYPICAL RAIN GARDEN- SHRUBS AND PLANTS APPLY 4" WOOD OR ROCK-, MULCH AROUND PLANT/NOS INV=915.3-, I I ! - I- EXISTING SOIL 1_ I - I I-I '--SGARIFY 12" MIN. DELOW---'' SAND/COMPOST SECTION RAIN GARDEN CROSS SECTION DETAIL NO SCALE OVERFLOW-916.1-, i -1 r I !---- I impoR7ED FILL: 30% ORGANIC LEAF COMPOST/70X WASHED SAND (DO NOT COMPACT) WV=9138--,,,‘ Fr r I areietina RelaW909 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 2 and that part of Lot I, lying Southerly of a line running from the Southerly corner of said Lot I, to a point in the easterly line of said Lot I, distant 18.00 feet northwesterly from the southeasterly corner thereof, Block I, PARKWOOD KNOLLS 2ND ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota. SCOPE OF WORK & LIMITATIONS: I. Showing the length and direction of boundary lines of the legal description listed above. The scope of our services does not include determining what you own, which is a legal matter. Please check the legal description with your records or consult with competent legal counsel, if necessary, to make sure that it is correct and that any matters of record, such as easements, that you wish to be included on the survey have been shown. 2. Showing the location of observed existing improvements we deem necessary for the survey. 3. Setting survey markers or verifying existing survey markers to establish the corners of the property. 4. Showing and tabulating impervious surface coverage of the lot for your review and for the review of such governmental agencies that may have jurisdiction over these requirements to verify they are correctly shown before proceeding with construction. 5. Showing elevations on the site at selected locations to give some indication of the topography of the site. We have also provided a benchmark for your use in determining elevations for construction on this site. The elevations shown relate only to the benchmark provided on this survey. Use that benchmark and check at least one other feature shown on the survey when determining other elevations for use on this site or before beginning construction. 6. While we show the dwelling to the south, the size and location of that building is approximate. We used an adjoining survey to show the size of the building and we located a few building corners to get the orientation of that building. If the building was not built per the survey the size and or location of that building may not be shown correctly. ,F04.0 *!on LI ,NON of Um Ad Ma INSTALL 0011BLE----•, ROW SILT FENCE 7. While we show a proposed location for this home or addition, we are not as familiar with your proposed plans as you, your architect, or the builder are. Review our proposed location of the improvements and proposed yard grades carefully to verify that they match your plans before construction begins. Also, we are not as familiar with local codes and minimum requirements as the local building and zoning officials in this community are. Be sure to show this survey to said officials, or any other officials that may have jurisdiction over the proposed improvements and obtain their approvals before beginning construction or planning improvements to the property. 8. Note that all building dimensions and building tie dimensions to the property lines, are taken from the siding and or stucco of the building. 9. While we show the building setback lines per the City of Edina web site, we suggest you show this survey to the appropriate city officials to be sure that the setback lines are shown correctly. Do this BEFORE you use this survey to design anything for this site. STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS: "•" Denotes iron survey marker, set, unless otherwise noted. INSTALL SILT FENCE ‘8" N 338.19. E _ -977.014 920.01nr ' 5/ \--922.06r , 911.601 I.-RETAINING WALL '991L6hr I I 1911.0ble I ) DRAINAGE SHALL BE ROUTED TO REAR OF PROPERTY 1NTH CONS7RUCTED GRASSED SWALE 92 CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLAHL.AL. DEPARTMENT &ma • Advance Surveying & Engineering Co. 17917 Highway 7 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345 Phone (952) 474-7964 Web: www.advsurcom X 921.9 ''..hySTALL SILT FENCE it?‘ 9210 OJ 4, C°) 9191 X 9194 ----INSTALL ROCK ClONSTRUCI7CIV \ ENTRANCE PER NOTES L=18.00 • R=53246 A 156'13" -Southeast corner of Lot 1. X 9233 7.4 77- - X 0096 X9092 °X910.1 :INSTALL SILT FENCE X 911.4 X 911.7 8928'40" • X▪ 912.3 9131 9fIX 910.3 9181 t 91704 ,__ 91701 :,‘,., 1 0,,,,, 911.5b 1-2171sotec.L - - -- - ---x-nor -1,-2 X 9151 X 915 PROPOSED RAIN GARDEN ' INSTALL----, !, (SEE DETAIL) SILT FENCE .- RETAINING WALL DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION 101 n. /X917.3 5-6-21 ADJUSTED SETBACK CLIENT NAME I JOB ADDRESS SUSAN BACH BRET HARTLEY 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN LEGEND EITSTYNO CONTOUR .g..11:577NG SPOT ELEVATION PROPOSED CON7191/1? PROPOSED SPOT AZAVATION .91241N4O6 AFRO" - FLOE' S/LT FENCE/11/0 ROLL TREE REMOVAL PROTECT EVSTINO TREE (INSTALL OR4NOA' CONST. FENCE AROUND TREE DT PROTECT% PROPOSED HARDCOVER House 4,116 Sq. Ft. Rear Screen Porch 434 Sq. Ft. Front Porch 377 Sq. Ft. Pervious Paver Driveway 2,715 Sq. Ft. Bituminous Driveway 733 Sq. Ft. Paver Patios/Steps 3,069 Sq. Ft. Concrete Pads 83 Sq. Ft. Pool 836 Sq. Ft. Spa 81 Sq. Ft. Ret. Walls 363 Sq. Ft. TOTAL PROPOSED HARDCOVER 12,611 Sq. Ft. AREA OF LOT TO OHW 45,758 Sq. Ft. PERCENTAGE OF HARDCOVER TO LOT 27.5% (AREA OF LOT BELOW OHW 5,042 Sq. Ft.) EXISTING HARDCOVER House 3,333 Sq. Ft. Paver Drive/Walk 3,391 Sq. Ft. Paver Patios 828 Sq. Ft. Concrete Surfaces 81 Sq. Ft. Bituminous Road 201 Sq. Ft. Rat. Walls 47 Sq. Ft. TOTAL EXISTING HARDCOVER 7,881 Sq. Ft. AREA OF LOT TO 011W 45,758 Sq. Ft. PERCENTAGE OF HARDCOVER TO LOT 17.2% (AREA OF LOT BELOW OM1 5,042 Sq. Ft.) (Existing Deck Not Included, Pervious Below) I PROPOSED BUILDING COVERAGE House 4,118 Sq. Ft. Rear Screen Porch 434 Sq. Ft. Front Parch 377 Sq. Ft. Paver Patios 2,249 Sq. Ft. Concrete Pads 83 Sq. Ft. Patio Credit -150 Sq. Ft. TOTAL PROPOSED COVERAGE 7,111 Sq. Ft. AREA OF LOT TO OHW 45,758 Sq. Ft. PERCENTAGE OF COVERAGE TO LOT 15.5% (AREA OF LOT BELOW OHW 5,042 Sq. Ft.) EXISTING BUILDING COVERAGE House 3,333 Sq. Ft. Existing Deck 483 Sq. Ft. Paver Patios 828 Sq. Ft. Deck/Patio Credit -150 Sq. Ft. TOTAL EXISTING COVERAGE 4,494 Sq. Ft. AREA OF LOT TO OHW 45,758 Sq. Ft. PERCENTAGE OF COVERAGE TO LOT 9.0% (AREA OF LOT BELOW OFIYI 5,042 Sq. Ft.) DATE SURVEYED: SEPTEMBER 21, 2017 DATE DRAFTED: MAY 4, 2021 SHEET TITLE PROPOSED SURVEY & TREE PROTECTION DRAWING NUMBER 210730 JR SHEET SIZE 22 X 34 SHEET NUMBER S I SHEET 1 OF 3 920 X 920.5 920 .92o. SF 0) 0) `c" r• i !.,.. .• ,!: -1,, Z."-, 0 r a L.r.. a u) g, a L • LUQ ` .1 I a t a 1 <> a . , . , . ,.. CITY OF EDINA a a .v.,., ..- %v.\ ,..... ., . -. . MAY 0 7 2021 , ,,› ,- , , , ‘. PLANNING DEPARTMENT LEGEND . CATCH RAW - - ME HYDRANT - POWER POLE . MANHOLE ▪ - TELEPHONE PED. ▪ - EIEG TRANORIIER • . WELL - RATE VALVE - wort POSE o -TREE FENCE UNE — S — SANITARY SEWER UNE —W— WATER UNE — G — CAS UNE - ST— - STORM DRAIN UNE —E— OVEINIEAD MTV LINE - CONCRETE SURFACE 2 5;6 DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION DRAPING ORIENTATION & SCALE SCALE - 1" = 20' 0 20 40 • • • • • CLIENT NAME/ JOB ADDRESS SUSAN BACH BRET HARTLEY 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN Advance Surveying & Engineering, Co. 17917 Highway 7 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345 Phone (952) 474-7964 VVeb yovAA. a dvsur corn I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN. SURVEY CR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY RE OR UNDER MY DIRECT 9UPER119014 AND THAT I MI A DULY REDSTERED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THEWS CF lE 7 OF IHRESOTA. Thomas M Boom # 42379 9 SEPTEMBER 25 2017 DATE SHEET TITLE EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY DRAPING NUMBER 171023 TB REV 10 - 27 DATE SURVEYED. SEPTEMBER 21, 2017 DATE DRAFTED. SEPTEMBER 25, 2017 SHEET SIZE 17 X 22 SHEET NO. S2 SHEET 2 OF 3 90).Z — X 909 2 40 X 9101 X 909 5 920 X 920 b Rea SF El P1 LEGEND EXISTINO CONTOUR FAISTING SPOT ELEPATION PROPOSED CONTOUR DRAINAGE ARBOR' - FLO" 5/.17' FENCE/DM ROLL - EXIST/NG' DRAINAGE AREA .1.0 PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA /11 ,-Benchmork: /' Top of monhole 917.4 4i7.4 ANNING DEPARTMEN SILT FENCE DRAINAGE SHALL BE ROWED 70 REAR OF PROPERTY WITH COVS7RUCTED GRASSED SWALE STORMVVATER REQUIREMENTS: RUNOFF TO RATE TO STREET/NEIGHBOR (SOUTH) & VOLUME CONTROL FOR RUNOFF TO POND (WEST) 1. VOLUME CONTROL - ONSITE RETENTION OF 1.1-INCH STORM EVENT OVER ALL ADDITIONAL PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACES ROUTED TO STREET/NEIGHBOR (SOUTH) & TO POND (WEST). EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA (ROUTED TO POND)= 7,881 SQUARE FEET PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA (ROUTED TO POND) = 12,661 SQUARE FEET REQUIRED VOLUME TO RETAIN = 4,780 X (1.1/12) = 439 CUBIC FEET VOLUME OF RETENTION PROVIDED (RAIN GARDEN) = 580 CUBIC FEET 2. RATE CONTROL - NO NET INCREASE IN RUNOFF RATE FROM EXISTING TO PROPOSED SITE CONDITIONS FOR THE ATLAS 14, 10-YEAR STORM EVENT RUNOFF TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTY (EAST) & TO STREET (SOUTH). REFER TO STORMWATER RUNOFF RATE SUMMARY TABLE. STORMWATER RUNOFF RATE SUMMARY OCAI FI 000 INIINOATION AREA' STORAGE VOLUME REQUIREMENT PER CITY: PROPOSED STORAGE VOLUME (VOLUME BELOW ELEV=908.1) SHALL BE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO EXISTING STORAGE VOLUME WITHIN FLOOD INUNDATION AREA (VOLUME BELOW ELEV=908.1). • EXISTING VOLUME WITHIN ELEVATION 908.1 - 425 CITRIC FEET • PROPOSED VOLUME WITHIN ELEVATION 908.1 = 8.477 CUBIC FEET RESULTS: PROPOSED SITE CONDITIONS WILL PROVIDE MORE THAN THE EXISTING STORAGE VOLUME WITHIN THE 908.1 FLOOD ELEVATION. 6" WASHED ROCK PLACE ROCK OWR GEOTEXTILE - - FABRIC TYPE IV. ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE NO SCALE -- 2- X 2" W000 OR STEEL FENCE POSE .9' MAX. SPACING GEOTEXTILE FABRIC - OVERLAP FABRIC 6" AND FASTEN AT 2' INTERVALS WIRE MESH REINFORCED LAY FABRIC IN THE TRENCH FABRIC ANCHORAGE TRENCH BACKFILL TRENCH MTH , TAMPED NATURAL SOL DIREGITON_Of .1.31_1I4SEF-; NO SCALE EXISTING DRAINAGE MAP INSTALL Da/ea-- ROW SILT FENCE •••,s. 0 fool / ..1 d i / Z4'9 I / ,i 'f' .4, 1 4, / / ( / \ , ,O ^O / kl / / 119060 ho rev 90. X 9055) X = 906 , lot lha E2x r= :n . 4 0 1 ole Ma I Ir x...) )) ) I 11 TO1 BE REMOVED I I I I /I I I I /1 I / I ( i 1 I I I I I < f 1, I I -4-, - I gl ----- -14 ------------- +, -- -------------- ‘,. )) \ \ --- I ----------- 41 I /4r \ 1 I rErieing Redoing St's' coMing Reaming 11411 PROPOSED! POOL ...' 77 .. \ (16X40') I !°,(WATER ELEK=92(.75) 9 r..,-*-/ A' "i (... // I / I t 4.56 /1155 ... , l ' or. :•-- 992,19.01; 92201 . :, (91.9.7be 1,— ' - / I ,-RETAINING WALL #2.17-' i 1•1::::', ; , / I / ( PAYER 1 X 9101 ) 1 ) 1 PA DD I I '-RET AINiNG WALL I i r'911-4 —WINING WALL T 91,23be / \ -922.01,7 920.07m PAW; PA 710 444 • L, X 74.6 9 E 701 N 338.19-- N 7911'19 88° E 91. -..ES. /4 "75 , a° )‘' 4s, PROPOSED DWELLING 91. Goroge Soar 917.0 threshold of ti door 97.7. door 92.,18--7.1.- 9252 X 922,5 9 X 9112 917 Benchmark Top of monho/e 917.4 1.11,717A 917.7 \ \X 9210 9259 X 9195 9' ••••STSTALL SILT FENCE X9209 X 9231 --Sou of L 0, X925. --SOu of L X 92 OVERLAP GEOTEXTILE FABRIC 6" AND FASTEN AT 2' INTERVALS X 915.4 TOAST— ,,RETAINING WALL *NOTES: 1. RESULTS ARE DERIVED FROM HYDROCAD MODELING SOFTWARE UTILIZING ATLAS 14 STORM DATA. 2. TYPE C SOILS PER WEB SOILS SURVEY. 3. RESULTS CONFIRM THAT RATE de VOLUME CONTROL REQUIREMENT HAS BEEN MET. LOCAL FLOOD INUNDATION AREA: STORAGE VOLUME REQUIREMENT PROPOSED DRAINAGE MAP ▪ - INSTALL SO- FENCE ...49 X wet X 9092 / --31 8928'40!- ▪ X 9123 9130 9170tmT 9151 -917.0he 915569 -k•359..SOJe.F._ • — 6,,,56,'X X 913.1 X 915•N"-PROPOSED RAIN6-23f r (SEE DETAIL) VI T FENCE --31 -5-- - X 912-3 9111 0119 172 17917 Highway 7 Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345 Phone (952)474-7964 Web: www.advsurcom DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION 5-6-21 ADJUSTED SETBACK I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER IAY DIRECT SUPERVISICN MO THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL OWL ENGINEER LINDER THE LAWS Cf THE STATE OE MINNESOTA. LICENSE NO MAY 4, 2021 DATE: DRAWING ORIENTATION & SCALE 0 20 40 IN MI NM • NI NI CLIENT NAME /JOB ADDRESS SUSAN BACH BRET HARTLEY 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN DATE SURVEYED: GEPTEMBEN 21, 2017 DATE DRAFTED: MAY 4, 2021 9191 ----/NsrALL ROCK CONSTRUC770N ENTRANCE PER NO7ES CITY OF EDINA INSTALL SILT FENCE MAY 0 7 2021 SUPPORT POST ANCHORAGE-2 INPLACE SOIL SILT FENCE NOTE ATTACH FABRIC TO SUPPORT POSTS MTH RINGS OR WE ITES IN SHEET SIZE SHEET NUMBER S3 SHEET 3 OF 3 STORM EVENT El (SOUTH)(CFS) P1 (SOUTH)(CFS) 10-YEAR 0.71 0.66 SHEET TITLE PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Advance Surveying & Engineering, Co. DRAWING NUMBER 210730 JR ARCHITECTURE 2919 JAMES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55408 612.353.4920 WWW.PKARCH.COM 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN 55436 CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION DATE: 05/07/2021 © 2021 PKA. ARCHITECTURE 17' VARIAN(' ARCHITECTURE 2919 JAMES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55408 612.353.4920 WWW.PKARCH.COM 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN 55436 CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT FRONT SETBACK LEGEND 0.-0" - 50'-0" 50'-0" - 80'-0" 80'-0" - 110' -0" 110' -0" - 160'-0" APPLICki DATE: 05/07/2021 © 2021 PKA. ARCHITECTURE NEIGHBORHOOD DIAGRAM ARCHITECTURE 2919 JAMES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55408 612.353.4920 WWW.PKARCH.COM 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN 55436 CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT viA A P PIA CATI N ¨ N N 1 1 1 ..• -- ---- — _ __ — - - - --• — -. . / ' / 0. oi* ------ // s I,---- / // • • • • G--- / // • • • // i / • / / Ii / / ,* / / • / / ‘ / / J Ij 75'-7349,. 79'-0 3/8" 40, • 0. .00 Ao. 76.75% of proposed residence is within the average setback as prescribed by the Sec.36-439. 100% of the proposed residence is within the setback of the existing struc- ture. 155'-.1 7/8" aft DATE: 05/07/2021 STREET SETBACK DIAGRAM I © 2021 PKA. ARCHITECTURE 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN 55436 ARCHITECTURE 2919 JAMES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55408 612.353.4920 WWW.PKARCH.COM CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT APROX. 101' APPROX. 66' r DATE: 05/07/2021 STREET ELEVATION DIAGRAM © 2021 PKA. ARCHITECTURE 2919 JAMES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55408 612.353.4920 WWW.PKARCH.COM 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN 55436 CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 1 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 17-212. 46412' 22'412' VARIANCE APPLICATION DATE: 05/07/2021 © 2021 PKA. ARCHITECTURE 2Y-912' _1 MAIN LEVEL PLAN 3/32" = 1'-0" ARCHITECTURE SCREEN PORCH DN 16-11„' POOL SEW 3 MAY 0 7 2021 BEDROOM PLANNING DEPARTMENT ARCHITECTURE 2919 JAMES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55408 612.353.4920 WWW.PKARCH.COM 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN 55436 LOWER LEVEL PLAN 3/3 2" = VARIANCE APPLICATION DATE: 05/07/2021 © 2021 PKA. ARCHITECTURE BATH 1I UNEXCAVATED MECH/STORAGE SAUNA UP EXERCISE HAI I cos I 31 UNEXCAVATED HOT TUB O O O kli,11100'illi#ilie#1001411*11\41t WOW El 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN 55436 111 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - KEY NOTES O 4.-a' VERTICAL PANELS „.0 STONE VENEER El GLASS GUARDRAIL M PREFINISHED METAL FLASHING 111 RETAINING WALL 1=1 OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR VERTICAL WOOD SCREEN ARCHITECTURE 2919 JAMES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55408 612.353.4920 WWW.PKARCH.COM CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION NORTH ELEVATION DATE: 05/07/2021 1/8" = 1'-0" © 2021 PKA. ARCHITECTURE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS-KEY NOTES _0 4,0' VERTICAL PANELS f L E STONE VENEER E GLASS GUARDRAIL FT! PREFINISHED METAL FLASHING E RETAINING WALL E OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR E VERTICAL WOOD SCREEN ARCHITECTURE 2919 JAMES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55408 612.353.4920 WWW.PKARCH.COM 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN 55436 rL CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT LAI DATE: 05/07/2021 EAST ELEVATION 1/8" = 1-0" © 2021 PKA. ARCHITECTURE SEE DRAWING 2, A-202A 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN 55436 I ‘011411,),A CITY OF EDINA MAY Ola 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT pPrArpyy r r+- Tl EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS-KEY NOTES 4,0" VERTICAL PANELS IA STONE VENEER El GLASS GUARDRAIL FLASHING METAL LA El RETAINING WALL 1=i OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR Ei VERTICAL WOOD SCREEN ARCHITECTURE 2919 JAMES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55408 612.353.4920 WWW.PKARCH.COM SOUTH ELEVATION + GARAGE ELEVATION 1/8 " = 11 -0" VARIANr 7 APPLICATIUN DATE: 05/07/2021 © 2021 PKA. ARCHITECTURE L J EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS-KEY NOTES r 4'-0" VERTICAL PANELS • STONE VENEER E GLASS GUARDRAIL PREFINISHED METAL L:J FLASHING E RETAINING WALL E OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR E] VERTICAL WOOD SCREEN ARCHITECTURE 2919 JAMES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55408 612.353.4920 WWW.PKARCH.COM 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE EDINA, MN 55436 CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT VARIANCE APPLICATION DATE: 05/07/2021 WEST ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0" © 2021 PKA. ARCHITECTURE PROJECT INFO: SITE ADDRESS: 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE. EDINA. MN LOT SIZE: SEE EXISTING SURVEY INFORMATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEE EXISTING SURVEY INFORMATION ZONING: SEE EXISTING SURVEY INFORMATION BUILDING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS: SEE EXISTING SURVEY INFORMATION AND VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR PROJECT JURISDICTION' CITY OF EDINA, MN OWNER'. SUSAN BACH it BRET HARTLEY 4639 FREMONT AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55419 GENERAL CONTRACTOR TBD SURVEY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY: ADVANCED SURVEYING AND ENGINEERING 17917 HIGHWAY 7 MINNETONKA. MN 55345 PHONE 952-474-7964 LOCATION MAP SHEET INDEX Issued VARIANCE APPLICATION • • • • • PRELIMINARY PERMIT SET BID SET CD SET REVISIONS PRICING 0 PROPOSED NEW TREE NEW SHRUB NEW PERENNIAL / ANNUAL GAS METER 0I OSA WATER METER AIR CONDITIONER UNIT TRASH CONTAINER GENERATOR PUP-UP EMITTER WATER SUPPLY 4-RI HOSE BIB O 0 0 0 110- 2/P sv E0 PLANTER POT SWING GATE [I. LIGHT FIXTURES EXTERIOR ELECTRICAL OUTLET -S- EXTERIOR LIGHT SWITCH LANDSCAPE LINE LEGEND PROPERTY LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT SETBACK ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK EXISTING CONTOURS PROPOSED CONTOURS LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER - —H. CENTER LINE SILT FENCE TREE PROTECTION FENCE FENCE, TYPE 1 FENCE, TYPE 2 — — — >> — DRAIN TILE SPRINKLER HEADS PLANT HATCH LEGEND TURF / SOD PLANTING AREA FESCUE SEEEDING - TYPE 1 SEEEDING TYPE 2 GROUND COVER - TYPE 1 GROUND COVER - TYPE 2 [sy.:.•:24 GROUND COVER - TYPE 3 SECTION/DETAIL HATCH LEGEND DEEP. DEPTH DOUBLE DECIDUOUS DEMoLisH, DEVCCITION DETAIL Da NETER DI YEISION5 Dr/AN CRAP/ DRAMANVS E EAST EA EACH EJ EXPANSION JOINT EL ELEVATION ELEC ELECTRICAL Ea EQUAL EAP BOUM yam EST ESTIVATE ETR EXISTPC TO REMAIN EACH WAY ISO EXPOSED EA EXTERIOR IMTG !MISTING DBL CELE DEMO DET DIA DIALS DI DR BUGS Irr. Sr ri I I 11, • I lens: WZ1 I: :1 1111111M1 1111111111 VA 2121 Lade rA nri TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LANDSCAPE SYMBOL LEGEND SITE ELEMENT TO BE REMOVED POINT OF BEGINNING TRAFFIC FLOW ARROW POINT OF ENTRY AT BUILDING STAIR CATCH BASIN. ROOF DRAIN, OR AREA DRAIN EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION DATUM ELEVATION < - SLOPEATAURFACE I DRAINAGE FLOW ARROW ,.n EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED si E AN I D X S TZT E R C E T E E T D O BE SAVED mow CRUSHED AGGREAGATE SURFACING DRY-SET UNIT PAVER (HERRINGBONE) MORTARAET UNIT PAVER (HERRINGBONE) DRY-SET UNIT PAVER (RUNNING BOND) MORTAR-GET UNIT PAVER (RUNNING BOND) DRYAET PAVING MORTARAET PAVING VENEER STAIR MONOLITHIC TREAD LANSCAPE STEPPER UNIT FLAGSTONE SURFACING SAND BLANKET RIPRAP POUROUS GRASS PAVING SYSTEM TURFSTONE PAVER SYSTEM NETLON ADVANCED TURF SYSTEM SLOPETAME EROSION CONTROL SYSTEM CONCRETE ASPHALT STONE, TYPE 1 STONE TYPE 2 STONE, TYPE 3 SAND MORTAR GRANULAR FILL COMPACTED AGGREGATE METAL WOOD DIMENSIONAL LUMBER (SECTION) PLANTING SOIL EARTH (DISTURBED) EARTH (COMPACTED OR UNDISTURBED) A ABA ABOVE AD AREA DRAIN ADA AYER1CMS WITH DISABILITIES ACT ADJ ADJACENT AGG AGGREGATE ALGA ALIGNMENT ALUM ALUMINUM A000 ANDCIZED APPROX APPROXIMATE ARCH ARCHITECT. ARCHITECTURE AVG AVERAGE D BB BALLED AND BuRLAPPED BC BAD( OF CURB RIFE BASEMENT FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATCHI BLDG BULDVO BOO BOTTOM CF CURB Bop BoTTomoF pcoL BOR BOTTOM OF RA VP BOB BOTTOM DF STAIR SOT BOTTOM BOA BOTTOM OF WALL SPAN BETWEEN C GAL CAL PER CAP CAPACITY CB CATCH MEN CHOW CHAMFER CP CAST IN PLACE CARL CML EcINEER CJ CONTROL-JOINT CL CENTER LINE CLR CLEAR. CLEARANCE CM CENTIMETER COU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CO CLEAN OUT COL COLUMN COW COV POSTE COMPACTED COC CONCRETE CONN CONDITION cow CONIFEROUS must CONSTRUCTION CONT coNTINvous CN TR CENTER CF CUBA FEET CU CUM CY CUBIC YARDS FAN FOuNDATOON FILTER FABRC FFE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION FG FINISHED GRADE FINISH FL FLOOR FOB FACE OF BRICK FoC FACE SF CONCRETE FON FACE OF WALL FT FEET. FOOT FIG FOOTING RAN FuRNLEHNG FVT FUTURE GA GAUGE GALV GALVANIZED GC GEHERALCONTRACTOR GEN GENERAL GENERATOR GEO GEOTECKNICAL GLASS, GLAZING HIGH/HEIGHT 1,13 HOSE BIB HC HAND CAP HccP HANDICAP HANDCAPPED KIM HARDw000 HRR HARDWARE HORV FOR Om/JAL WISH POINT HANDRAL I-02 HEIGHT HT LO. INSIDE MAVETER, INSIDE Divas,. LE INVERT ELEVATION IN PAN INCHES INCL INCLUDED INSUL INSULATION INT INTERIOR INV INVERT ELEVATION AT JOIST JT JOINT K KO. KNOCKOUT LLA LA LB LF. COOL Coo LP. LT LENGTH LANDSCAPE ARCHrtecT POUND LINEAR FOOT LOCAT/ON LIARS OF CISTURBA4cE COW POINT LIGHT YAW MAINTAIN, vAINTELANcE VAS WASONRY VAT MATERIAL MAX MAXIMUM VECH VE-ChslicAL VEER MEMBRANE VFR MANUFACTURER VII MANHOLE MIN MINIMUM ESC MISCELLANEOUS MT METAL N WA NEE TILE NOM NTS NOT APPLICABLE IAT FOR CONSTRUCTION NOT IN CONTRACT NUMBER NOMINAL ?KIT TO SCALE 0 OA OVERALL 0.C. ON CENTER OUTSDE WAIVER. OUTSIDE CIVENSION OFD OVERFLOW DRAIN cH OVERREAD DHA OR WARY HIGH WATER LURK SPAS OPERNG opP OPPOSITE CRAM GRNAVENTAL PA PLANTED AREA PAR PARALLEL PC POOR OF CURVATURE, PRECAST PERF PERFORATED PERI. PERPIENCCuLAR FL PLATE. PROPERTY LINE POMO PLYACOD PAT PAINT POS POINT OF BEGINNING POI PONT OF INTERSECTION POT Fora OFTANG9CY p5p POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT PSI POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH Pi POINT PRESSURE TREATED PU FoLy LAI ETHANE PVC POLYVINYL CHLORCE PEAT PAVEMENT PVR PAVER a OTR QUARTER STY OUANTITY R RISER. RELOCATE SR) RIsER H RAD RADIUS Elart RD ROOF DRAIN REPAR REPPORCPIG BAR RECFJ•T RECEPTACLE REcT RECTANGULAR REF REFERENCE REIN. REINFORCE), RENFORcEv err REM REMOVE Ran REQUIRED RET RETAINING. RETURN REV REVISION RO 801950 OP ES1`4 RON RIGHT OF vox RP RADIUS POINT RT RIGHT s =AIN SOGO ScHEMAE SECT SECTION SO STORM DRAIN OF. SQUARE FEET SLR SHEET SIM SIVILAR SLR SEALER SPEC SPECIFICATION sPP S S P IES c.H.NARE SS SANRARY SEWER SST sTANLE.ES STEEL ST STORM SEWER STA STATION STD sTANOARD STL STEEL STRUCT STRUCTURE STRUCTURAL SURF SURFACE SURFACED S.Y. SQUARE YARD GYM STA,VETRCa. T DI THICK TAB TOP AND BOTTOM TBC TOP OF BACK OF CURB TM TO BE DETERMINED MR THRESHOLD TCC TOP OF CURB. TOP OF CONCRETE TOO TOP OF DECK TGF TOP OF FOOTING TOP TOP OF PAWNS TOP° TOPOGRAPHY TOR TOP DE RAMP TOS TOP OF STAIR TOW TOP OF WALL TRANS ELECTRICAL TRANsFoR vER TSL TCP OF SLAB TVLS TRAVIS VAN LERE STOP TTP TYPICAL U UTE UTILITY V VAR VARIABLE VARIES V61 VEHICLE VP VERIFf FIELD VERT VERTICAL VOL VOLUME WEST MADE, MOTH MATH WO MAHOUT WD WOOS WATER LEVEL ,AP WATERPROOF, HORK POINT WS MATER SUPPLY WT IVEGHT MA I WAR MA WATER MAELDECHALRE FAEPC WELDED MARE MESA TO YARD SYMBOLS 6 APS L ANGLE ARC LENGTH • AT CENTER LINE O CAVETER • DEGREE MAGER. pouND PER PLUSMNUS PROPERTY LINE SheetI L000 L001 1010 L011 1101 L102 1201 L301 L401 1402 L501 L601 1602 L609 L700 Tile PROJECT INFO GENERAL PROJECT NOTES EXISTING CONDITIONS / REMOVALS PLAN TREE INVENTORY SITE LAYOUT PLAN MATERIALS PLAN GRADING 8 DRAINAGE PLAN ENLARGEMENT PLAN LANDSCAPE PLAN LANDSCAPE ENLARGEMENT PLAN WALL ELEVATIONS AND DETAILS SURFACING AND LIGHTING DETAILS SITE ELEMENT DETAILS TREE PROTECTION MID EROSION CONTROL DETAILS SCHEDULES AND SPECIFICATIONS PAVING HATCH LEGEND rON ASPHALT SURFACING CONCRETE SURFACING LANDSCAPE ABBREVIATIONS BACH-HARTLEY RESIDENCE ISSUED FOR VARIANCE: May 6, 2021 ere Irr -*POB FLOW g-4 Ei 8 000.00 LO XX LOCA LocNx 211 1ST STREET NORTH, SUITE 350 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55401 t 612 345 4275 CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACH-HARTLEY RESIDENCE 5 4 0 4 STAUDER CIRCLE, EDINA, MN The designs shown and theorised herein thcluling a1 techmal dravehgs, grapNcs and sped-calms, theme/, are proprietary and cannot be copied, cloplcated or commerchly exploited, is nhole or in pati wilvirt Use express writers permissith of Trash Van there Studd, LLC. These are amailabh for knifed review and evaluatith by Clients, cons/lads, contractors, government agencies, and vendors orifi h accordance with tri nuke. CopyngN 2021 Travis Van there Studio, LLC. Al nghh resumed. I hereby cerbfy that 505 plan, spechcabon, or report yeas prepared by me or under my deed supereision and that I am A clay Licensed Landscape Architect under the lard of the Mate of Minnesota. TRAVIS VAN LIERE keno no: 4372B dale. 4/22/2021 NOTE. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Rey 1 Uesthipbon Date - ISSUED FOR VARIANCE 0555.2021 DravAng PROJECT INFORMATION Drawn By. ELI Date: 5,5,2021 Scale: Sheet L000 Rev t Dectnphon Date 05.052021 ISSUED FOR VARIANCE Dawn Ty Date Scale Sheet 4,22,2021 VA L001 TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 211 1ST STREET NORTH, SUITE 350 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 t 612 345 4275 CITY OF EDINA MAY 0'7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACH-HARTLEY RESIDENCE 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE, EDINA, MN The designs shown and descnbed here6 6cludng al techntal drawings, graphics and specteati/na thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied, duplcated or commercialy eel/Toted, in whole or in pa rt, 'About the express written peimissiln of Travis Van Liere Stud*, LLC. These are available for tented revim and evaluainn by charts, consuls/4e contract° rs. government agencies, and vendors only 6 accordance wth the notice. Copyoght 2021 Trays Van Aare Stud*, MC. AI rights reserved. I hereby certty that Ods Oen, specticabon, or report was prepared by me or under my deed supervision and That I am a duly Licensed Landscape Archiect under the taws of the State of Minnesota. TRAVIS VAN LIERE Itense no: 43728 date: 4/22/2021 NOTE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROJECT NOTES 9 z.i B GENERAL NOTES 1. USE OF THE WORD 'CONTRACTOR' IN THE DRAWINGS AGITATES PATH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND ALL SUBCONTRACTORS ON THE PROJECT. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL MATERIALS AND LABOR TO COMPLETE THE SCOPE OF WORK AS INDICATED IN THE DOCUMENTS. 3. ALL CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING THEIR WORK WITH THE WORK OF OTHERS. NEITHER THE OWNER NOR THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF THE WORK. NO ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION WILL BE MADE TO ANY CONTRACTOR FOR EXTRA WORK RESULTING FROM FAILURES OF COORDINATION. 4. THE CONTRACTOR MUST ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES, REGULATIONS, AND PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS GOVERNING THE WORK OR MATERIALS SUPPLIED. 5. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR APPLYING FOR, OBTAINING. AND PAYING FOR ALL NECESSARY PERMITS, APPROVALS AND INSPECTIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE A COPY OF ALL DRAWINGS WITH THEM ON SITE AT ALL TILES AND SHALL RECORD ALL MODIFICATIONSCHANGES TO THE WORK ON THE DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A COMPLETE AS-BUILT SET OF DRAWINGS TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AT PROJECT COMPLETION. 7. EXCEPT FOR ITEMS SPECIFICALLY MARKED AS 'BY OTHERS' OR 'NOT IN CONTRACT, IT IS THE INTENT OF THESE DRAWINGS TO DESCRIBE A COMPLETE PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR MUST THOROUGHLY REVIEW THE DRAWINGS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A BID AND IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS DISCOVERED. NO ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION WILL BE MADE FOR ITEMS OF WORK NOT SHOWN OR DESCRIBED ON THE DRAWINGS THAT COULD BE REASON/LA Y INFERRED FROM THE DRAWINGS IN PROVIDING THE OWNER WITH COMPLETE SYSTEMS ANDA COMPLETE PROJECT. 8. EXISTING CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE FROM A SURVEY PERFORMED BY OTHERS. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES MAY NOT BE EXACT AS TO THEIR LOCATION, CHARACTER, OR NUMBER. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING THE CONDITIONS OF THE SITE PRIOR TO BIDDING MD CONSTRUCTION AND FOR IMMEDIATELY NOTIFYING THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE DRAWINGS. 9. THE CONTRACTOR MUST MAINTAIN AND PROTECT ALL BENCH MARKS, SURVEY MONUMENTS, PROPERTY IRONS, LAYOUT STAKES AND OTHER REFERENCE POINTS. ALL FINES AND REPLACEMENT COSTS FOR DAMAGE TO ANY OF THESE ITEMS THAT IS DUE TO THE CONTRACTOR'S ACTS OR NEGLIGENCE ARE THE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. 10. THE CONTRACTOR SHOULD EXPECT TO FIND TELEPHONE, ELECTRIC, GAS, CABLE TELEVISION, AND FIBER OPTIC LINES, IRRIGATION SYSTEMS, AND OTHER PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR, IN COOPERATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANY, IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY THE LOCATION, SIZE, AND DEPTH OF ALL UTILITIES PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTMTY. AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTMTY. THE CONTRACTOR MUST CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 1300 2521156 OR TO NOTIFY THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANIES AND VERIFY THE EXACT LOCATION, SIZE, AND DEPTH OF ALL UTILITIES WITH THE APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANIES. 11. ANY RELOCATION OF PUBLIC UTILITIES SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANY AND ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE UTILITY COMPANY, INCLUDING FEES, BONDS, PERMITS REQUIRED FOR SUCH WORK. 12. PRIOR TO ANY WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THE CONTRACTOR MUST OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS AND SUBMIT A TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN COMPLYING WITH THE LATEST EDITION OF THE MOOT ROADWAY REQUIREMENTS. 13. DO NOT PROCEED WITH ANY PORTION OF WORK AS INDICATED IN THE DOCUMENTS IF OBSTRUCTIONS, DISCREPANCIES OR UNKNOWN CONDITIONS ARE ENCOUNTERED. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY ON HOW BEST TO PROCEED. 14. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN A SAFE AND SECURE SITE THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH NATIONAL, STATE, AND LOCAL SAFETY ORDINANCES. 15. UPON SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION OF PROJECT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REQUEST Al WRITING, A FINAL ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION WITH THE OWNER MO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. CODES 1. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LOCAL CODES MD ALL OTHER GOVERNING AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION. 2. APPLICABLE CODES. THIS PROJECT IS TO COMPLY WITH TIE CITY OF EDINA MUNICIPAL CODE AND SUB-CODE REQUIREMENTS AND STATE OF MINNESOTA CODE REQUIREMENTS. VERIFY IF THIS PROJECT WILL REQUIRE SPECIAL REVIEW AND APPROVALS FROM THE NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT. SUBMITTALS I SHOP DRAWINGS I SITE MOCK-UPS 1. CONTRACTOR IS TO PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS MD FIELD MOCKUPS TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION FOR THE FOLLOWING ITEMS' PAVING, WALLS, FENCES. SPECIAL METAL FABRICATIONS 8 CONNECTIONS, SPECIAL FINISHES, SPECIALTY DETAILS, AND LIGHTING. 2. MOCK-UPS WILL ESTABLISH EXPECTATIONS FOR QUALITY NAD WORKMANSHIP. 3. MOCK-UPS WILL BE SET UP IN A SECURED PORTION OF THE SITE FOR REFERENCE THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION AND REMAIN UNTIL PROJECT SITE CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION. 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW STAMP, SIGN AND DATE ALL SUBMITTALS PRIOR 'TO FORWARDING TO ARCHITECT/ENGINEER. THE ENGINEER'S REVIEW IS FOR CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESIGN CONCEPT AND GENERAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE RELEVANT CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. THE ARCHITECTS REVIEW DOES NOT RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR OF THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY TO REVIEW, CHECK AND COORDINATE THE SUBMITTALS THE CONTRACTOR REMAINS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ERRORS AND OMISSIONS IN THE SUBMITTALS. 5. ALL CONTRACTORS SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS AS REQUIRED FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO COMMENCING IMTH ANY WORK. 6. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL BE IN THE FORM OF BLACK-LINE PRINTS OR PORTABLE DOCUMENT FORMAT (PDF) FOR REVIEW. EXISTING CONDITIONS / REMOVALS NOTES 1. VERIFY MD STAKE ALL PROPERTY LINES AM) STRUCTURE LOCATIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH CONSTRUCTION. MAINTAIN PROPERTY LINE STAKES, CONTROL POINTS. BENCH MARKS, AND OFFSET STAKES THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. ANY LOST SURVEY MARKERS TO BE REPLACED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT THE CONTRACTORS EXPENSE. 2. THE LIMITS OF WORK INDICATED ON DRAWINGS, ARE GENERAL IN NATURE MD ARE INTENDED TO DEFINE THE GENERAL VICINITY IN WHICH THE SCOPE OF WORK EXISTS. ACTUAL LIMITS OF WORK SHALL INCLUDE AREAS NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE SCOPE OF DESIGN INTENT. 3. THE CONTRACTOR MUST REVIEW THE LIMITS OF WORK WITH THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO STARTING WORX.ANY WORK OUTSIDE THE LIMITS OF WORK AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS OR AS MODIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WILL. BE DONE AT CONTRACTORS EXPENSE UNLESS THE CONTRACTOR NOTIFIES THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF THE NEED FOR THE WORK IN WRITING AND IS DIRECTED TO PERFORM THE WORK BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR OWNER BEFORE PERFORMING THE WORK. RESTORATION OR REPLACEMENT OF ANY PAVEMENTS, CURB. SUTTER, RANT MATERIALS, TURF, UTILITIES, OR OTHER SITE ELEMENTS OUTSIDE THE MARS OF WORK THAT ARE DAMAGED DUE TO THE CONTRACTOR'S ACTS OR NEGLIGENCE WILL BE AT THE CONTRACTORS EXPENSE. THE EXTENT AND ACCEPTABILITY OF THE REPLACEMENT WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 4. A TREE PERMIT MAY BE REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. THE CONTRACTOR MUST SIGN ALL PERMITS AND PAY THE PERMIT FEE BEFORE STARTING WORK AND MUST COMPLY WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF ALL GOVERNING AGENCIES IN PERFORMING THE WORK OF THIS PROJECT. 5. THE CONTRACTOR MUST MEET MD IMPLEMENT ALL AIDES, SWPRI, AND EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION 6. ALL TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES MUST BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO ANY REMOVAL WORK AND MUST BE MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL MEASURES HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY IMPLEMENTED AND ESTABLISHED. 7. INSTALL SILT FENCING AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE LIMITS OF WORK AND MAINTAIN UNTIL PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL IS ESTABLISHED. ALL SILT FENCE MUST HAVE GEO-TEXTILE FABRIC WITH STEEL POSTS. MACHINE SUCING OF SILT FENCE AROUND OR UNDER TREES WILL NOT BE PERMITTED. SILT FENCE AROUND OR UNDER TREES MUST BE HAND PLACED AND FASTENED TO THE GROUND WITH STAPLES. 8. THE CONTRACTOR LS RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEWING THE EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS OF THE SITE AND FOR INSTALLING AND MAINTAINING EROSION CONTROL MEASURES WHERE NEEDED. EVEN IF THEY ARE NOT INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. B. INLET PROTECTION (SILT FENCE BARRICADES, SILT SACKS. RISER PIPES, OR FILTER FABRIC AND GRAVEL) MUST BE INSTALLED IN ALL EXISTING AFFECTED CATCH BASINS PRIOR TO ANY REMOVAL WORK AND W ALL NEW CATCH BASINS IMMEDIATELY AFTER CATCH BASIN INSTALLATION. 10. ADJACENT STREETS, ALLEYS, MCI PROPERTIES MUST BE SWEPT TO KEEP THEM FREE OF SEDIMENT AND MATERIALS TRACKED, BLOWN. OR WASHED FROM THE SITE. CONTRACTOR MUST MONITOR CONDITIONS AND SWEEP AS NEEDED OR WITHIN 24 HOURS NOTICE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. SWEEPING IS INCIDENTAL TO THE PROJECT. 11. CONTRACTOR MUST MAINTAIN DUST CONTROL FOR THE SITE AT ALL TIMES AND PROVIDE WATERING TRUCKS AS NEEDED OR WITHIN 24 HOURS NOME BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. DUST CONTROL IS INCIDENTAL TO THE PROJECT. 12. WHERE DISTURBED SOILS WILL LAY EXPOSED FOR MORE THAN 21 DAYS, THE CONTRACTOR MUST SEED WITH A TEMPORARY COVER CROP TO PREVENT EROSION. TEMPORARY SEED MIX MUST BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. TEMPORARY SEEDING IS INCIDENTAL TO THE PROJECT, 13. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR SECURING THE SITE AND PROVIDING PROTECTION FROM THE WORK FOR THE PUBLIC. ALL OPEN EXCAVATIONS AND OTHER HAZARDS MUST BE FENCED. 14. THE RELOCATION AND/OR PROTECTION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES MUST BE COORDINATED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND ANY COSTS FOR SUCH WORK IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. NO ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION WILL BE ALLOWED FOR EXTRA TIME AND EFFORT OR PROVISIONS NECESSARY TO WORK AROUND ANY UTILITIES. 15. IT IS THE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO REPORT ANY EXISTING DAMAGE OR FAULTY CONDITION OF ANY UTILITIES TO THE UTILITY OWNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AS, ONCE WORK HAS COMMENCED. IT WILL BE ASSUMED THAT ALL DAMAGE TO UNDERGROUND OR ABOVE GROUND INSTALLATIONS HAS BEEN CAUSED BY THE CONTRACTORS OPERATIONS MD IT WILL BE THE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO RAKE THE NECESSARY REPAIRS. UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, CONTACT ALL UTILITY OWNERS AND MACE ARRANGEMENTS FOR A FIELD INSPECTION TRIP BY A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CONTRACTOR AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UTILITY DINNERS TO CONFIRM THAT ALL DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS HAVE BEEN REPAIRED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNERS 16 THE CONTRACTOR MUST PROTECT ALL EXISTING ROADS, CURB, STRUCTURES, TREES, AND SITE ELEMENTS NOT DESIGNATED FOR REMOVAL ANY DAMAGE SHALL BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED AT CONTRACTORS EXPENSE TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 17. ITEMS SHALL REMAIN UNTIL DESIGNATED FOR REMOVAL. REMOVE DESIGNATION ITEMS SHONA ON THE PLAN TO THE FULL DEPTH OF THEIR CONSTRUCTION UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 18. VERIFY THE LOCATION AND DIMENSION OF ITEMS TO BE REMOVED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 19. ALL CONCRETE AND ASPHALT REMOVAL SHALL BE SAW CUT. EDGES OF MATERIALS TO REMAIN SHALL BE SHORED UP AND PROTECTED DURING CONSTRUCTION TO PRESERVE EDGE INTACT. REPAIRS TO DAMAGED EDGES TO BE DONE WITH CARE AND AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. 20. ITEMS ENCOUNTERED BELOW GRADE AND NOT SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 21. SALVAGE EXISTING MATERIALS AS INDICATED ON THE PLANS. REMOVE SALVAGED MATERIALS AS INDICATED WITH CARE AND STORE ON SITE IF APPLICABLE, CLEAN ALL DEBRIS AND CONSTRUCTION LATERAL FROM SALVAGED ITEMS AND REUSE AS DIRECTED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 22. REMOVE DEMOLISHED MATERIALS FROM SITE. DISPOSAL BY BURNING ANDIOR BURYING IS PROHIBITED. ALL UNSUITABLE MATERIAL AND DEBRIS MUST BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF MAY AND ALL GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THIS PROJECT. 23. RELOCATE / TRANSPLANT EXISTING PLANT MATERIAL AS INDICATED IN THE DRAWINGS AS DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. MAINTAIN TRANSPLANTED RANT MATERIAL THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. 24. EXCAVATIONS SHALL BE ADEQUATELY SHORED. BRACED AND SHEETED SO THAT EARTH WILL NOT SETTLE AND SO THAT EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS OF ANY KIND WILL BE FULLY PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE. ANY DAMAGE RESULTING FROM LACK OF SHORING, BRACING AND SHEETING SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE REPAIRED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER. TREE PRESERVATION 1. PROTECT ALL TREES DESIGNATED TO BE SAVED MO ALL HARDWOOD TREES 6 INCHES OR GREATER IN DIAMETER THAT ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY DESIGNATED FOR REMOVAL. 2. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTACT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO VISIT SITE MD VERIFY TREES TO BE SAVED. CONTRACTOR MUST REVIEW THE DRAWINGS MO DAILY WORK SCHEDULE SO THAT, SHOULD PROPOSED GRADES POSE A HAZARD TO A TREE TO BE SAVED', THE CONTRACTOR'S WORK IS NOT IMPEDED MO THERE WILL BE TIME TO STUDY THE ISSUE. 3. WHERE EXISTING TREES ANGOR SIGNIFICANT SHRUB PASSINGS ARE FOUND ON SITE. WHETHER SHOWN ON THE EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN OR NOT, THEY SHALL BE PROTECTED AND SAVED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE OR UNLESS DIRECTED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO BE REMOVED MD/OR ARE IN AN AREA TO RE GRADED. ANY QUESTION REGARDING WHETHER PLANT MATERIAL SHOULD REMAIN OR NOT SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO REMOVAL. 4. ALL TREES TO BE PRESERVED AS INDICATION ON LANDSCAPE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALS RAN SHALL BE PROTECTED BY 6' HEIGHT CHAIN LINK FENCING. THE FENCE SHALL BE LOCATED ATA MAMMA AROUND THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE FOR ALL TREES ISEE TREE PROTECTION FENCING DETAILS). THE FENCE SHALL BE FIRMLY ANCHORED INTO THE GROUND AND SHALL REMAIN UPRIGHT MD INTACT UNTIL ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTMTY IS COMPLETE. BARRIER FENCES MAY BE USED TO PROTECT TREES OUTSIDE OF THE /MN CONSTRUCTION AREAS. BARRIER FENCES SHALL CONSIST OF SAFETY-CAPPED REBAR POSTS PLACED NO MORE THA) 8 FEET ON CENTER WITH 4 FOOT HIGH ORANGE SQUARE MESH BARRIER FENCING, RESINET SLA440, OR EQUAL, ATTACHED TO POSTS. BARRIER FENCE MUST BE INSTALLED AT THE LIMITS OF THE DRIALINE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND MUST NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL FINAL LANDSCAPING IS TO BE COMPLETED. 5. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES OR STORAGE SHALL NOT OCCUR WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTED AREAS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STARE OR MARK OUT ALL TREE PROTECTION FENCING LOCATIONS ON SITE FOR APPROVAL BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ON SITE. 6. THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO WATER, FERTILIZE AND ATTEND TO OTHER MAINTENANCE NEEDS OF THE EXISTING TREES AS NEEDED PER THE ARBORISTS RECOMMENDATIONS TO MAINTAIN HEALTHY GROWTH THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. PROVIDE 6' PROTECTIVE LAYER OF HARDWOOD MULCH AROUND ALL EXISTING TREES WITHIN CRITICAL WORK AREAS. SPREAD CHIPS USING HAND TOOLS ONLY, SUCH AS SHOVELS AND WHEEL BARRELS. 7. WHEN EXCAVATION IS TO OCCUR NEAR A TREE THAT IS TO BE PROTECTED MUST BE CARRIED OUT, DAMAGE CM BE LIMITED BY ROOT PRUNING. ROOT PRUNING SHALL BE COMPLETED BEFORE GRADING HAS STARTED AND SHALL OCCUR BENEATH THE PROTECTIVE FENCING AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. 8. ROOT PRUNING FOR PROTECTED TREES SHALL BE PERFORMED WITH A TRENCHING MACHINE PRIOR TO ADJACENT EXCAVATION COMMENCES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE THE LIMIT OF ROOT PRUNING AS INDICATED ON THE PLANS. LIMITS OF TRENCHING SHALL REAPPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO MY TRENCHING IN THE FIELD. DO NOT TRENCH FOR IRRIGATION OR ELECTRICAL WITHIN DRIP LINES OF EXISTING TREES. COORDINATE ALL TRENCHING REQUIRED FOR UTILITY WORK WITH LANDSCAPE PLANS. IF ROOTS OF TREES DESIGNATED TO BE SAVED ARE EXPOSED, CUT OR OTHERWISE BROKEN AND DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS. THEY MUST BE IMMEDIATELY AND CLEANLY ROOT PRUNED WITH A SHARP ME OR PRUNER. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF MIT EXPOSED ROOTS THAT REQUIRE PRUNING PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH WORK. NO ROOTS OVER 3' IN DIA. SHALL BE PRUNED WITHOUT REVIEW BY ARBORIST AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 9. LIMIT SOIL COMPACTION BY LIMIT CONSTRUCTION ACTMTY AROUND EXISTING PRESERVED TREE CRITICAL ROOT ZONES. THIS INCLUDES RESTRICTING ALL TRAFFIC AND STORAGE OF MATERIALS FROM UNDER THESE AREAS. 10. ANY PRUNING OF EXISTING PROTECTED TREES SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A CERTIFIED ARBORIST AS DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. SOIL PREPARATION NOTES 1. SOIL PREPARATION IS CRITICAL IN CREATING A HEALTHY AND LONG-LASTING LANDSCAPE. REMOVE EXISTING TOPSOIL MO STOCKPILE ON SITE FOR USE ATA LATER DATE. 2. CONDUCT A SOIL EVALUATION OF EASING STOCKPILED TOPSOIL TO BE USED TO DETERMINE THE SOILS COMPOSITION, COMPACTION RATE, NUTRIENT QUALITIES, ORGANIC CONTENT, PH LEVELS AND WATER HOLDING CAPABILITIES. THE DEAL PARTICLE SOIL MIX IS APPROXIMATELY 45% SAND. 40% SILT, 10% CLAY, AND 5% ORGANIC MATERIALS WITH A PH LEVEL NEAR SEVEN. 3. PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM, CONTRACTOR TO PREPARE SOIL TO ENSURE A PROPER ENVIRONMENT FOR PLANT ROOT DEVELOPMENT. 4. CONTRACTOR TO DECOMPACT SOILS IN PLANTING AREAS BY ROTO-TILLING, DISC OR RIPPING SOIL TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 12'. DECOMPACTI NG OF SMALLER PLANTING AREAS SUCH AS PARKING AREAS AND AROUND STRUCTURES, MAY REQUIRE THE REMOVAL OF COMPACTED SOILS TOA DEPTH OF 18' OR MORE AND THEN REPLACEMENT WITH NEW OR MENDED SOILS. REMOVAL ALL DEBRIS 2* OR GREATER FROM NEW OR AMENDED SOILS. 5. WHEN PERFORMING SOIL DECOMPACTION, MULTIPLE PASSES ACROSS THE AREA LAKY BE REQUIRED. WHEN POSSIBLE VARY DIRECTIONS OF DECOMPACTION TO ENSURE ADEQUATE COVERAGE. WHEN USING A DISC OR RIPPING EQUIPMENT. IT IS REQUIRED THAT THE FINAL PASSES OVER THE ARE BE MADE WITH A ROTC/AMER TO BREAK UP ANY LARGE CLUMPS TO MAKE FINAL GRADING EASIER. 6. AFTER INITIAL SOIL DECOMPACTION PROCEDURES ARE PERFORMED, SOIL AMENDMENTS SHOULD BE ADDED. THE ADDITION OF SOIL AMENDMENTS SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM SOIL TESTING CONDUCTED PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH CONSTRUCTION. SOIL AMENDMENT MAY INCLUDE INORGANIC MATERIAL SUCH AS SAND, SILT OR CLAY, WHICH HELP IMPROVE SOIL TEXTURE. ORGANIC MATERIAL SUCH AS COMPOST, MANURE. AND PEAT MOSS MAY ALSO BE USED AND HELP IMPROVE SOIL STRUCTURE. OTHER AMENDMENTS SUCH AS FERTILIZER IMPROVE NUTRIENT CONTENT AND SULFUR ADJUSTS THE SOIL PH LEVEL. SULFUR SHALL BE INCORPORATED AT THE RATE OF ONE POUND OF SULFUR PER 100 SQUARE FEET. 7. ALL AMENDMENTS SHOULD BE PARED THOROUGHLY WITH EXISTING SOIL. AN ADDITIONAL SOIL TEST SHALL BE TAXER TO ENSURE PROPER SOIL CONDITIONS PRIOR TO PLANTING. 8. DURING THE REMAINDER OF THE LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION. VARIOUS AREAS OF THE SITE MAY BE RE-COMPACTED DUE TO THE USE OF EQUIPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC. DECOMPACT ANY AREAS THAT BECOME RE-COMPACTED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF FINAL LANDSCAPING COMMENCES. LAYOUT NOTES 1. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO ACCURATELY SURVEY MD LAYOUT THE PROPOSED WORK FOR CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY GRADES, LINES. LEVELS, DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH WORK. NOTED DIMENSIONS TARE PRECEDENT OVER SCALED DIMENSION, LARGER SCALE OVER SMALLER SCALE, ADDENDA AND CLARIFICATION OVER PREVIOUS DOCUMENTS. 2. CONTRACTOR TO LAY OUT PROPOSED LOCATIONS FOR ALL HARDSCAPE, WALLS, AND SITE ELEMENTS MD VERIFY LAYOUT WITH LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. HARDSCAPE, WALLS AND SITE ELEMENTS ARE DIMENSIONED ON THE LAYOUT PLAN. ANY DISCREPANCIES OR CONFLICTS WITH THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OR OTHER DRAWINGS SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY FOR CLARIFICATION AND/OR ADJUSTMENT. 3. FOR DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING BUILDINGS, PROPOSED BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS MD RELATED WORK, REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS 4. WHERE DIMENSIONS ME CALLED AS 'EQUAL,' SPACE REFERENCED ITEMS EQUALLY, MEASURED TO CENTERLINE. 5. MEASUREMENTS ARE TO FACE OF BUILDING, WALL, FIXED SITE ELEMENT, GRID LINE OR DEFINED PROPERTY LINE IRON I BENCH MARKS. DIMENSIONS TO CENTER LINE ARE AS INDICATED. S. INSTALL INTERSECTING ELEMENTS AT 90 DEGREE ANGLES TO EACH OTHER UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PROVIDE EXPANSION JOINTS WHERE CONCRETE FLAT WORK MEETS VERTICAL STRUCTURES SUCH AS WALLS, CURBS, STEPS MD BUILDING ELEMENTS. 8. PROPOSED SURFACES SHALL MEET EXISTING SURFACES WITH A SMOOTH AND CONTINUOUS TRANSITION AND FLUSH ALONG ENTIRE EDGE 9. EXPANSION JOINTS IN CONCRETE WALKS SHALL BE LOCATED NOT MORE THAN TWENTY FEET po,o' 0.C.) MAXIMUM OR AS INDICATED ON THE PLANS. II) VERIFY ALL JOINTING LAYOUTS FOR CONCRETE IN FIELD PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION. ALL CONTROL JOINTS IN CONCRETE TO SAW CUT UNLESS APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 11 LAYOUT OF PROPOSED TRAILS TO BE STAKED OUT BY CONTRACTORS AND APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IN FELD. GRADING NOTES 1. EXCAVATIONIACKFP-L MD COMPACTION SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS. 2. PROVIDE AND DRAINAGE ALL TIMES. 3. ALL DESIGN CONTOURS AND PROPOSED ELEVATIONS INDICATED ARE TO FINISH GRADE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ACCOUNT FOR ALL IMPORTED SURFACE MD PLANTING MATERIALS IN DETERMINING EARTHNORK REQUIREMENTS 5. GRADING OPERATIONS MUST MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR EROSION. NO GRADING, STOCKPILING OF MATERIALS, OR STAGING IS PERMITTED OUTSIDE THE LIMITS OF WORK. 7. PRIOR TO ROUGH GRADING THE SITE, THE CONTRACTOR MUST REMOVE ALL TOPSOIL IN AREAS TO BE DISTURBED AND STOCKPILE ON SITE FOR FUTURE USE. EXCESS TOPSOIL MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE AFTER FINISH GRADING AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. IL IF THE EARTHWORK FOR THE SITE IS ANTICIPATED TO PRODUCE AN EXCESS OF MATERIAL, THE CONTRACTOR MUST REMOVE ALL EXCESS MATERIAL FROM THE SITE AND DISPOSE OF IT AT THE CONTRACTORS EXPENSE. 9. NO TOPSOIL SHALL BE REMOVED FROM SEEDING MOOR RESTORATION AREAS WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 10. TOPSOIL COMPACTED BY CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC IN SEEDING AUDI OR RESTORATION AREAS OF THE PROJECT SHALL BE LOOSENED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 11. COMPOST SHALL BE MECHANICALLY INTEGRATED INTO THE TOP 6' OF EXISTING SOIL BY MEANS OF ROTO-TILLING AFTER CROSS-RIPPING. GROUND COVER .1 PERENNIAL BED AREAS SHALL BE AMENDED ATA RATE OF B CUBIC FEET PER THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OF NITROGEN STABILIZED ORGANIC AMENDMENT AND 10 LBS. OF 12-12-12 FERTILIZER PER CU. YD., ROTO-TILLED TOA DEPTH OF 8'. NO MANURE OR ANIMAL-BASED PRODUCTS SHALL BE USED FOR ORGANIC AMENDMENTS. 12. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MAY DIRECT ON SITE CHANGES TO THE GRADING TO SUIT ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS AND TO ACHIEVE DESIGN INTENT. SUCH CHANGES SHALL BE DONE AT THE NO INCREASE TO THE PRICE OF THE CONTRACTED WORK. 13. THE TOPS OF EXISTING MANHOLES, INLET STRUCTURES AND SANITARY CLEANOUTS MAY BE ADJUSTED AS NECESSARY TO MATCH PROPOSED GRADES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE STANDARDS. 14. STORM WATER ROOF DRAIN LOCATIONS ARE BASED UPON PRELIMINARY ARCHITECTURAL PLANS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO AND FOR VERIFYING LOCATIONS ON FINAL ARCHITECTURAL PLANS. SEEDING NOTES I. ALL SEEDED AREAS SHALL RE WARRANTED BY THE CONTRACTOR FORA PERIOD OF TWO YEARS AFTER OWNER ACCEPTANCE. ANY ACTS OF VANDALISM OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY OCCUR PRIOR TO THE OWNER'S WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. 2. SEED ALL DISTURBED AREAS NOT SPECIFICALLY DESIGNATED AS STRUCTURE, HARD SURFACE, PLANTING AREAS OR LAWN 3. THE SEEDING CONTRACTOR MUST NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF THE PROPOSED SEEDING START DATE A MINIMUM OF ONE WEEK PRIOR TO SEEDING. 4. METHOD OF SEEDING MO SEEDING RATE SHALL BE M LISTED ON SEEDING KEY. 5. NO SEEDING MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED UNLESS THE CONTRACTOR. PRIOR TO THE SUBMISSION OFA BID ARDOR QUOTATION, REQUESTS APPROVAL OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 6. THE SEEDING / RESTORATION CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP NEWLY SEEDED AREAS WATERED FORA MINIMUM OF 4 WEEKS OR UNTIL SEED IS 80% ESTABLISHED. SPRING SEEDING COMPLETED AFTER MAY 15TH MUST BE WATERED BY THE CONTRACTOR FOR AT LEAST 4 WEEKS, OR UNTIL AUGUST 15TH, WHICHEVER IS LONGER. THE SEEDING I RESTORATION CONTRACTOR MUST ALSO PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A BID FOR ENDMDUAL WATERING APPLICATIONS WITHIN THE TWO YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD FOR POTENTIAL WATERING DURING UNUSUALLY DRY PERIODS. 7. EROSION CONTROL MATTING MUST BE USED ON ALL SLOPES GREATER THAN 3:1. A. SEEDING IN RESTORATION AREAS WILL FOLLOW PROCEDURES LISTED IN RESTORATION NOTES' 9. EROSION CONTROL MATTING IS REQUIRED IN RESTORATION AREAS SHALL BE INSTALLED BY THE SEEDING / RESTORATION CONTRACTOR. PLANTING NOTES 1. EXACT LOCATION OF RANT AREAS AND MATERIALS TO BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJUST PLANTINGS TO EXACT LOCATIONS IN THE FIELD. 2. VERIFY PLANT COUNTS AND SQUARE FOOTAGES. QUANTITIES ARE PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. IF QUANTITIES ON PLANT LIST DIFFER FROM GRAPHIC INDICATIONS ON PLANS, THEN THE GREATER NUMBER I QUANTITY SHALL PREVAIL. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR QUANTITY TAKE OFFS AND SHALL PROVIDE FULL COVERAGE OF PLANTING AREAS AS INDICATED ON DRAWINGS. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY PLANTING DISCREPANCIES. 3. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE WARRANTED BY THE CONTRACTOR FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER OWNERS WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE. ANY ACTS OF VANDALISM OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY OCCUR PRIOR TO THE OWNERS WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. 4. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST APPROVE THE DECOMPACTED SUBGRADE AFTER DECOMPACTION WORK IS COMPLETE AND PRIOR TO TOPSOIL PLACEMENT. 5. PROVIDE 4 INCHES OF TOPSOIL FOR ALL LAWN TURF AREAS. PROVIDE A MINIMUM OFI2 INCHES OF PLANTING SOIL MIX CONSISTING OF 1/3 TOPSOIL. 1/3 SAND, AND 1/3 COMPOST IN ALL SHRUB AND PERENNIAL BEDS. WHERE SHRUBS OR PERENNIALS ARE GROUPED, CREATE ONE CONTINUOUS PLANTING BED. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO APPROVE TOPSOIL PRIOR TO SPREADING. CONTRACTOR MUST SUBMIT TESTING RESULTS MD FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATK/NS. 6. ALL NEW TREE PLANTINGS AND EDGED PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE 3 INCH DEPTH OF DOUBLE- SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH. ALL NEW EDGED GROUNDCOVER PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE 3 INCH DEPTH OF PINE BARK MULCH. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO APPROVE MULCH PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 7. ALL PLANTING BEDS NOT CONTAINED BY STRUCTURES, CURB, OR PAVING MUST BE EDGED WITH METAL EDGING (ALUMINUM OR STEEL). B. WHERE LAWN / SOD ABUTS PAVED SURFACES. FINISHED GRADE OF SOD MUST BE HELD 1 INCH BELOW THE SURFACE ELEVATION OF THE PAVED SURFACE. B. SOD SHALL BE LAW PARALLEL TO THE CONTOURS AND SHALL HAVE STAGGERED JOINTS. 10. STAKE ALL PROPOSED TREE LOCATIONS IN FIELD FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT RESERVES RIGHTS TO MANE ADJUSTMENTS TO LOCATIONS PRIOR TO PLANTING. 11. ALL PROPOSED PLANTS SHALL BE STAKED AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS MOOR AS DIRECTED IN THE FIELD BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST APPROVE ALL STAKING LOCATIONS OF PLANT MATERIAL PRIOR TO ANY DIGGING. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SHALL BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 4B HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE DELIVERY DATE FOR ALL PLANT MATERIAL. 12. PAINT DR STRING ALL NEW PLANTING AREAS AND LOCATIONS IN FIELD FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT APPROVAL. ADJUSTMENT IN LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLANT MATERIAL MAY BE NEEDED IN THE FIELD. SHOULD AN ADJUSTMENT BE ADVISED, THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST BE NOTIFIED. 13. ALL RANT MATERIAL SHALL BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED (COMMON OR LATIN NOTAENCLAR/RE) WITH A PLASTIC TAG WHICH SHALL NOT BE REMOVED PRIOR TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS APPROVAL. 14. ALL PLANTING STOCK SHALL MEET AND CONFORM TO 'ME AMERICAN STANDARDS FOR NURSERY STOCK', ANSI, LATEST WRITTEN STANDARDS AND CONSTITUTE MINIMUM QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL PLANT MATERIAL. 15. AN INSPECTION TO APPROVE PLANT MATERIAL AT THE NURSERY SHALL OCCUR PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE 48 HOUR NOTIFICATION TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 15. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE FERTILIZED UPON INSTALLATION WITH DRIED BONE MEAL OR OTHER FERTILIZER AS INDICATED MIXED IN WITH THE RANTING SOIL PER THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS. 17. ALL PLANT MATERIALS TO BE INSTALLED PER PLANTING DETAILS. 18. WRAP ALL DECIDUOUS TREES FROM THE GROUND TO THE FIRST BRANCH. WRAPPING MATERIAL SHALL BE QUALITY, HEAVY WATERPROOF CREPE PAPER MANUFACTURED FOR THIS PURPOSE. WRAP ALL DECIDUOUS TREES PLANTED IN THE FALL PRIOR TO DECEMBER 1ST, MD REMOVE ALL WRAPPING BETWEEN MAY 1ST AND JUNE 1ST, OR AS INSTRUCTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 19. IF THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR PERCEIVES ANY DEFICIENCIES IN THE PLANT SELECTIONS, SOIL CONDITIONS, OR MY OTHER SITE CONDITIONS WHICH MIGHT NEGATIVELY AFFECT RAW MATERIAL ESTABLISHMENT, SURVNAL, OR GUARANTEE, LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BRING THESE DEFICIENCIES TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 20. NO PLANT MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED UNLESS APPROVAL IS REQUESTED OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO THE SUBMISS KW OFA BID MOOR QUOTATION. ANY SUBSTITUTION IS REQUIRED TO APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 21. PROVIDE MATCHING FORMS AND SIZES FOR PLANT MATERIALS WITHIN EACH SPECIES AND SIZE DESIGNATED ON THE PIANS. ALL RANT MATERIAL SHALL MEET SEE AND QUALITY STANDARDS AS INDICATED IN DOCUMENTS AND SHALL BE OF TOP QUALITY AND VIGOROUS HEALTH. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECT PLANTS NOT MEETING THESE STANDARDS. 22. ALIGN MD EQUALLY SPACE PLANTINGS IN ALL DIRECTIONS AS DESIGNATED ON THE PLANS. 23. FINISH GRADE OF PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE 1' BELOW ADJACENT PAVING OR SURFACING AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED 24. ALL TREES PLANTED ADJACENT TO PUBLIC AND/OR PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS SHALL BE PRUNED CLEAR OF ALL BRANCHES BETWEEN GROUND ANDA HEIGHT OF EIGHT (8) FEET FOR THAT PORTION OF THE PLAN LOCATED OVER THE SIDEWALK ARDOR ROAD. 25. PRUNE NEWLY RANTED TREES AND SHEAR NEWLY PLANTED HEDGES AS DIRECTED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 26. PROTECT ALL NEW EVERGREEN PLANTINGS FROM WINTER BURN BY WRAPPING NEW PLANTINGS WITH BURLAP. MAINTAIN THROUGHOUT WARRANTY PERIOD. 27. TREE ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED WHERE TREES ARE PLACED WITHIN 5 FEET OF EXISTING OR NEW PAVEMENT SURFACES. THE ROOT BARRIER SHALL BE PLACED ON THE SIDE OF THE TREE PIT CLOSEST TO THE IMPROVEMENTS. DO NOT ENCLOSE ROOT BALL FOR TREES WITH ROOT BARRIER. 28. ALL PLANTING AREAS ON SLOPES OVER 4.1 SHALL RECEIVE COCONUT FIBER EROSION CONTROL NETTING FROM ROLLS. NETTING SHALL BE OCT-125, AS MANUFACTURED BY NORTH AMERICAN GREEN (OR EQUAL). INSTALL MO RIME PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. 2B. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR THE OWER ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION UPON COMPLETION OF ALL PLANTING WORK 30. PLANTING IN SEEDING MOOR RESTORATION AREAS WILL FOLLOW PROCEDURES LISTED IN 'SEEDING NOTES' AND 'RESTORATION NOTES' 31. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN ALL NEW PLANTING AREAS OF PROJECT UNTIL SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION OF PROJECT. 32. AT THE TIME OF FINAL INSPECTION ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE IN HEALTHY, VIGOROUS GROWING CONDITION, PLANTED IN FULL ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS. IRRIGATION NOTES 1. IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO BE DESIGN / BUILD. AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED TO PROVIDE COVERAGE FOR ALL PLANTING AREAS SHOWN ON THE PLAN. LOW VOLUME EQUIPMENT SHALL PROVIDE SUFFICIENT WATER FOR PLAN GROWTH WITH A MINIMUM WATER LOSS DUE TO WATER RUN OFF. IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL USE HIGH DUALITY, AUTOMATIC CONTROL VALVES, CONTROLLERS AND OTHER NECESSARY IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT. ALL COMPONENTS SHALL BE NON-CORROSIVE MATERIALS. ALL DRIP SYSTEMS SHALL BE ADEQUATELY FILTERED MD REGULATED PER TIE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDED DESIGN PARAMETERS. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR APPROVAL OF SYSTEM PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 2. IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL OPERATE ON POTABLE WATER, AND THE SYSTEM WILL HAVE APPROPRIATE BACKFLOW PREVENTION DEVICES INSTALLED TO PREVENT CONTAMINATION OF THE POTABLE SOURCE. 3. IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED, TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE, TO CONSERVE WATER BY USING THE FOLLOWING DEVICES AND SYSTEMS. MATCHED PRECIPITATION RATE TECHNOLOGY ON ROTOR MD SPRAY HEADS WiHEREVER POSSIBLE). RAIN SENSORS, AND MULTIPRCGRAM COMPUTERIZED IRRIGATION CONTROLLERS FEATURING SENSORY INPUT CAPABILITIES. 4. ALL LAWN, PLANTING AREAS AND NEW TREE PLANTINGS WITHIN PROPERTY LIMITS MUST BE IRRIGATED, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. NEW SEEDING AND/ OR RESTORATION AREAS TO BE IRRIGATED SEPARATELY AS INDICATED ON DRAWINGS. 5 ALL NEW PLANTING BEDS, NEW TREE PLANTINGS, GREEN ROOFS AND CONTAINER PLANTINGS TO RECEIVE DRIP LINE EMITTER IRRIGATION. ALL TURF/ LAWN. SEEDED ANDI OR RESTORATION AREAS TO RECEIVE OVERHEAD SPRAY IRRIGATION. 6 PROPOSED IRRIGATION LAYOUTS AND MATERIAL LISTS MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH BIDS. ACCEPTABLE PRODUCT MANUFACTURERS INCLUDE RAINBIRD. TORO, AND NETAFIM. THE IRRIGATION CONTROLLER SHALL BE SIZED TO ACCOMMODATE ALL PROPOSED ZONES. INCLUDING ANY AREAS INDICATED AS FUTURE IRRIGATION, AND SHALL BE FULLY AUTOMATIC WITH A VOLATILE MEMORY CHIP. 7. IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL IRRIGATION SLEEVES. IF ADDITIONAL SLEEVING IS REQUIRED, IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. ONLY TRENCHLESS METHODS WILL BE APPROVED AFTER PAVING IS COMPLETED. Et THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING A COMPLETE IRRIGATION SYSTEM FROM THE POINT OF CONNECTION AT THE COLD WATER STUB OUT LINE(S) FROM THE BUILDING. THE STUB OUT(S) FROM THE BUILDING, THE BACKPLOW PREVENTER, AND OTHER CODE REQUIRED PLUMBING ELEMENTS MUST BE PROVIDED BY A LICENSED MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR. B. THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR MUST INSTALL THE IRRIGATION CONTROL PANEL IN THE LOCATION INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS OR AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. COORDINATE LOCATION WI APPLICABLE TRADES. 10. TIE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR MUST PROVIDE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUALS AND ON-SITE INSTRUCTION TO THE OWNER Al THE SYSTEM OPERATION. THE IRRIOATION CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INITIAL SYSTEM STARTUP, WINTERIZATION FOR THE FIRST WINTER, AND STARTUP THE FOLLOWING SPRING. 11. IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL INCLUDE IRRIGATION COVERAGE FOR ALL SEEDING I RESTORATION AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATEDARIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH SEEDING / RESTORATION CONTRACTOR REGARDING IRRIGATION SYSTEM SCHEDULE AND IRRIGATION NEEDS W RESTORATION AREAS. 12. ALL SPRAY AND ROTOR HEAD LOCATIONS SHALL BE STAKED, FLAGGED MOOR OTHERWISE CLEARLY WAKED ON THE GROUND PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. SPRINKLER HEAD STAKING SHALL BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE OR THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BEFORE INSTALLATION. RIMED LOCATIONS SHALL BE SPACED TO PROVIDE HEAD-TO-HEAD COVERAGE. 13. SET SPRINKLER HEADS PERPENDICULAR TO FINISH GRADE OF AREAS TO BE IRRIGATED UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. 14. ADAIST IRRIGATION SYSTEM LAYOUT FOR ANY VERTICAL OBSTRUCTIONS OR INTERFERENCE. DO NOT OVERSPRAY ONTO WALKS, ROADWAYS. WALLS, FENCES AND / OR BUILDING STRUCTURES. 15. IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE BASED ON MINIMUM PRESSURE AND MAXIMUM FLOW DEMAND. VERIFY WATER PRESSURE BEFORE START OF CONSTRUCTION. REPORT MY DIFFERENCES IN WATER PRESSURE READINGS AT IRRIGATION POINT OF CONNECTION PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM. 16. R EXISTING IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS TO BE RETAINED FOR REUSE, CONTRACTOR SHALL PROPOSE ALL REQUIRED ADDITIONS TO EXISTING SYSTEM NECESSARY TO OBTAIN FULL COVERAGE OF ALL LANDSCAPE WORK AS INDICATED ON DRAWINGS AND PROVIDE A DESIGN BUILD DRAWING IDENTIFYING EXISTING AND PROPOSED IRRIGATION SYSTEM COMPONENTS FOR INSTALLATION. 17. PROVIDE ASDUILT DRAWING OF FINAL IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO OWNER I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR THEIR RECORDS. UPON COMPLETION OF INSTALLATION OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM, IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: ACCURATE AND COMPLETE 'AS BUILT' PLANS OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM INCLUDING 8-1/2111' ZONE MAP TO BE PLACED INSIDE EACH CONTROLLER BOB. A LOG ON ALL WATER WINDOWS, RUN SCHEDULE TIMES, AND OTHER CHANGES AND/OR MODIFICATIONS TO THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SINCE INSTALLATION. ONE HOUR OF TRAINING TO OWNER ON IRRIGATION SYSTEM AND CONTROLLER OPERATION. THREE OF EACH TYPE OF HEAD AND EMITTER INSTALLED. ONE OF EACH TYPE OF VALVE INSTALLED. REVIEW WINTERIZATION PROCEDURES FOR IRRIGATION SYSTEM WITH OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE. SITE LIGHTING NOTES 1. THE LIGHTING RAN IS INTENDED TO SHOW THE LOCATIONS AND TYPE OF LUMINAIRE FIXTURES ONLY, POWER SYSTEMS, CONDUIT, WIRING. VOLTAGES AND OTHER ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. EXTERIOR LIGHTING TYPES SHALL CONSIST PRIMARILY OF LOW VOLTAGE LANDSCAPE LIGHTING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. ALL LANDSCAPE LIGHTING AND THEIR COMPONENTS SMALL MEET THE UL1838 GOVERNING STANDARDS. 3. CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY LIGHTING LOCATIONS THAT CONFLICT WITH DRAINAGE, UTILITIES OR OTHER STRUCTURES. 4. COORDINATE PROPOSED POWER SOURCES FOR ALL SITE LIGHTING ELEMENTS MD THEIR LOCATIONS. COORDINATE MATCHING AND CONTROLS SYSTEMS FOR EXTERIOR LIGHTING WITH OWNER, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. VERIFY ALL SWITCH LOCATIONS ON SITE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 6. INSTALL LIGHT FIXTURES PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND PER LOCAL, STATE. AND NATIONAL REGULATIONS. 7. ALL LIGHTING IN PAVEMENT AND HARDSCAPE TO BE CORE DRILLED. VERIFY FINAL LOCATIONS IN HARDSCAPE AREAS PRIOR TO DRILLING.. 8. ALL LIGHT POLE BASES SHALL BE DESIGNED AND SIGNED OFF BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. 9. ALL ELECTRICAL JUNCTION BOXES FOR EXTERIOR LIGHTS SHALL BE LOCATED IN PLANTING AREAS OR OTHER DISCRETE LOCATIONS AND APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 10. ALL TRANSFORMERS SHOULD BE SIZED TO ALLOW FOR ANY FUTURE INCREASE IN SYSTEM LOAD, AS WELL AS THE RESISTIVE VALUES ASSOCIATED WITH LONGER CABLE RUN DISTANCES MD THE USE OF VOLTAGE TAPS GREATER THAN 12-VOLT. INSTALL TRANSFORMERS PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. 11. ALL 120-VOLT ELECTRICAL WORK SHOULD BE PERFORMED BY A LICENSED ELECTRICIAN UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED BY LAW. REFER TO ALL NEC AND ALL LOCAL CODES FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS. 12. ALL EXTERIOR RECEPTACLE BOXES SHOULD BE G.F.C.1.-PROTECTED FOR USE WITH TRANSFORMERS THAT UTILIZE A PLUG-IN CORD. ALL RECEPTACLE BOXES SHOULD UTILIZE AN -INOSE' OR 'BUBBLE" TYPE RECEPTACLE COVER TO PROTECT IT FROM WATER ENTRY. 13. ALL RECEPTACLES, LOW VOLTAGE TRANSFORMERS, AND FIXTURES CANNOT BE LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF ANY WATER SOURCE THAT WOULD BE NORMALLY OCCUPIED BY HUMANS. 14. EXTERIOR LIGHTING SYSTEM SHALL CONNECT TO EITHER PHOTOCELL OR ASTRONOMICAL TIMER. VERIFY FINAL LIGHTING CONTROLS WITH OWNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. RESTORATION NOTES 1. ALL EXOTICS INVASIVE AND UNDESIRED TALL NATWE SPECIES TARGETED FOR REMOVAL WILL BE REMOVED BY HAM) OR SPRAYED WITH APPROVED HERBICIDE. THIS WORK SHALL BEGIN DURING THE FIRST STAGES OF CONSTRUCTION AND EXTEND THROUGH THE MANAGEMENT PERIOD. 2. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST APPROVE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY OF NATIVE SPECIES TO BE LEFT AND MANAGED ON SITE. 3. RESTORATION PLANTING AND SEEDING SHALL BEGIN AFTER ALL CONSTRUCTION MO TREE PLANTING WORK IS COMPLETE AND THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM INSTALLED BY OTHERS IS IN PLACE. 4. RESTORATION CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF THE PLANTING AND SEEDING START DATE A MINIMUM OF ONE WEEK PRIOR TO SEEDING AND PLANTING. 5 SALVAGED TOPSOIL APPROVED BY THE RESTORATION CONTRACTOR WILL BE SPREAD ONLY ON AREAS CLEARED OF TOPSOIL DURING CONSTRUCTION. APPROVED TOPSOIL WILL ONLY BE SPREAD TO THE ORIGINAL GRADE OR GRADE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 6 SEVERELY COMPACTED SOIL CAUSED BY CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC SHALL BE LOOSENED TO ORIGINAL GRADE BY OTHERS. MINOR COMPACTION SHALL BE LOOSENED BY RESTORATION CONTRACTOR TO ORIGINAL GRADE OR GRADE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 7. SEEDING SHALL BE HAND BROADCAST AND RAKED EITHER BY HAND OR WM A DRAG HARROW. B. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE WARRANTED BY THE RESTORATION CONTRACTOR FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER OWNER'S WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE. ANY ACTS OF VANDALISM OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY OCCUR PRIOR TO THE OWNER'S WRITTEN ACCEPTANCE SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR. 9. SEEDED AND SODDED AREAS SHALL BE WATERED WITH THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM (INSTALLED BY OTHERS) FORA MINIMUM OF FOUR WEEKS OR UNTIL SEED LS ESTABLISHED. ALL WATERING ASSUMES A SYSTEM COVERING ALL RESTORATION AREAS IS IN PLACE AND RESTORATION CONTRACTOR HAS CONTROL OVER WATERING SCHEDULE FOR RESTORATION AREAS. ID. PLANTINGS SHALL BE PLACED ACCORDING TO SPECIFIC ZONE SECTION NEEDS AND NOT ACCORDING TOA FIXED PATTERN. ON-CENTER GOALS ARE ON AVERAGE. 11. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST APPROVE ALL SEEDING LOCATIONS PRIOR TO SEEDING. 12. NO FERTILIZER OR SOIL AMENDMENTS ARE REQUIRED IN THE RESTORATION AREAS UNLESS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE RESTORATION CONTRACTOR. 13 RESTORATION CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR THE OWNER ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION UPON COMPLETION OF ALL RESTORATION SEEDING MD PLANTING WORK. WARRANTY 1. ALL HARDSCAPE AND PAVING AREAS TO BE WARRANTED FOR 1 YEAR AFTER GINNER ACCEPTANCE. 2. ALL PLANT MATERIAL TO BE WARRANTED FOR 1 YEAR AFTER OWNER ACCEPTANCE. AN INSPECTION OF PLANT MATERIAL WILL OCCUR AFTER THE FIRST YEAR FOLLOWING SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION I OWNER ACCEPTANCE. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SHALL NOTIFY THE CONTRACTORS OF INSPECTION DATE. REPLACEMENTS MAY BE REQUIRED AT THIS TIME. REPLACEMENTS SHALL BE PLANTED WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF INSPECTION UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACCEPTED HORTICULTURAL PRACTICES. LANDSCAPE STRUCTURAL NOTES I. BUILDING CODE CONFORM TO LATEST EDITION OF STATE BUILDING CODE AND INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (MCI 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MEANS AND METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION MD FOR THE SAFETY OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLYING WITH ALL SAFETY PRECAUTIONS AND REGULATIONS DURING THE WORK. THE ENGINEER WILL NOT ADVISE ON NOR ISSUE DIRECTION AS TO SAFETY PRECAUTIONS AND PROGRAMS. 3. THE DRAWINGS HEREIN REPRESENT THE FINISHED STRUCTURE. DURING ERECTION OF THE STRUCTURE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR TEMPORARY SHORING, BRACING, FORMING, ETC. TO HOLD THE STRUCTURE IN PROPER ALIGNMENT MO TO WITHSTAND ALL LOADS TO WHICH THE STRUCTURE MAY BE SUBJECTED. SUCH MEASURES SHALL BE LEFT IN PLACE AS LONG AS REQUIRED FOR SAFETY MO UNTIL ALL FRAMING AND CONNECTIONS ARE IN PLACE. 4. FOOTINGS AND SOIL DATA' 4.1. SOIL PARAMETERS ARE ASSUMED FOR THE DESIGN OF THE RETAINING WALLS FOR THE FOLLOWING' 4.1.a. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING CAPACITY= 2000 PSF. 4.1.b. LATERAL SOIL PRESSURES (EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURE) 45 PCF. 4.2. FOOTINGS SHALL BEAR ON NATURAL UNDISTURBED SOIL OR ON COMPACTED, ENGINEERED FILL. ALL SUBGRADE SHALL BE PREPARED AND COMPACTED ACCORDING TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS PROVIDED BY A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. 5. ALL TOPSOIL, FILL AND OTHER UNSUITABLE BEARING MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVED. A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER SHALL INSPECT THE EXCAVATED AREA TO ENSURE ALL MATERIALS REQUIRING REMOVAL HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND TO VERIFY THE SOIL BEARING CAPACITY USED FOR DESIGN PRIOR TO CONCRETE PLACEMENT. 6. EMBEDMENT DEPTH FROM EXTERIOR GRADE TO BOTTOM OF FOOTING SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 5'43'. BOTTOM OF FOOTING ELEVATION SHALL BE LOWERED AS REQUIRED TO MEET THIS MINIMUM. 7. ALL RETAINING WALLS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES OF FREE-DRAINING GRANULAR BACKFILL, FULL HEIGHT OF WALL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. PROVIDE CONTROL JOINTS IN RETAINING WALLS AT APPROXIMATELY EQUAL INTERVALS NOT TO EXCEED 40 FEET OR 3 TIMES THE WALL HEIGHT. PROVIDE EXPANSION JOINTS AT EVERY FOURTH CONTROL JOINT UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. B. MUD SLABS, FOOTINGS OR SLABS SHALL NOT BE PLACED ONTO OR AGAINST SUBGRADE CONTAINING FREE WATER, FROST OR ICE. CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO PREVENT ANY FROST OR ICE FROM PENETRATING ANY FOOTING OR SLAB SUBGRADE BEFORE AND AFTER RACING CONCRETE UNTIL SUCH SUBGRADES ARE FULLY PROTECTED BY THE PERMANENT BUILDING STRUCTURE OR PROPER DEPTH OF BURY. 9. DO NOT UNDERMINE EXISTING FOUNDATIONS. 10. REINFORCED CONCRETE. 10.1. DESIGN CODE' USE BUILDING CODE REOUREMENTS FOR STRUCTURAL CONCRETE (ACI 318), LATEST ADOPTION 102. CONCRETE MIXES SHALL BE DESIGNED PER ACI 301 USING THE FOLLOWING PARAMETERS. 10.26. PORTLAND CEMENT CONFORMING TO ASTM C150 OR C595. 102.b. AGGREGATE CONFORMING TO ASTM C33. 102.0. ADMIXTURES CONFORMING TO ASTM C494, C1017, AND C260. DO NOT USE CALCRAA CHLORIDE OR ADMIXTURES CONTAINING CALCIUM CHLORIDE. 102.1. CONCRETE SHALL BE READY-MIXED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C94. 11. REINFORCING STEEL 11.1. BARS -ASTM A615, GR. 60 11,2. PLACEMENT OF CONCRETE MD REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI AND CRSI STANDARDS. 112. DO NOT FIELD BEND BARS PARTIALLY EMBEDDED IN HARDENED CONCRETE UNLESS SPECIFICALLY INDICATED OR ACCEPTED BY THE ENGINEER. 11.4. PROVIDE CORNER BARS EQUAL IN SIZE AND SPACING TO WALL HORIZONTAL REINFORCEMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE DETAILED. 12. COLD WEATHER CONCRETING SHALL FOLLOW PROCEDURES IN ACI 306. 13. HOT WEATHER CONCRETING SHALL FOLLOW PROCEDURES IN ACI 305. 14. PROVIDE 32 BAR DIAMETER LAP LENGTHS FOR WALL FOOTINGS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. FOR OTHER LAP LENGTHS PROVIDE CLASS B LAP SPLICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACI 318. 15. BAR SUPPORTS AND HOLDING BARS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL REINFORCING STEEL TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH MINIMUM CONCRETE COVER. BAR SUPPORTS SHALL BE PLASTIC, PLASTIC TIPPED, EPDXY COATED OR STAINLESS STEEL FOR UNCOATED STEEL. BM SUPPORTS FOR COATED STEEL SHALL BE PLASTIC, PLASTIC COATED OR EPDXY COATED. 16. CONCRETE MIX DESIGN(S) SHALL RE SUBMITTED TO ENGINE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW. 17. PROVIDE REINFORCING STEEL SHOP DRAWINGS TO ENGINEER I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW / APPROVAL. 18. MATERIAL STRENGTHS. DE'C''''' COMESSNE Tie:OTZ V. "r '''' ''''' %PAINTER TOLIEVENT ... fo.-}, MOM. 3..1 I VT 4 II' IP MOM ..(SY ..,,,, MOH.. I / TOLERANCE ON AIR CONTENT AS DELIVERED SHALL BES 1.5% 2/ PRIOR TO THE ADDITION OF PLASTICIZER OR HIGH-RANGE WATER-REDUCER 1 / TOLERANCE ON AIR CONTENT AS DELIVERED SHALL BE 21.5% LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION NOTES 0 Cri -92s is • ▪ 9u-.9/LV.W 3 9 -5._____, ___. z ., X 1 5 \ 4 . l \ \ ' \' :/' , 9931 x: \ ' i'',5•6.8, \ \L / \ \ / . 92)9 \ / I X583, ' ; ! \ \ X 923 ii \ ▪ ,,-1 24" ---- — __ r 1 C., / =I .e;.." 2,7. 9 , 1 7 0 ..../ \ 41 4 / IX- 0 4 / 14 7 ' / 0 —.1.—.• / 8t , , t --.--1.' / VAP Pe4allle4 .44 VI 4r _L / TOPSOIL ) • 101 9'1) 1' 9224 POND OHW: 907.60 >AT. 9 4,7 \ ,/ //`‘ 69 if STOKPILE / X 918 / /,• 1 3 2 / '111391., ) N /•,;\ // )) / I 419 kr 89°- 916 6 — -1"-X-9169 X 9 — \ s \ • II / X-, 4. \ I , i , I e I \ c., X 510 1 i .., 5 ..?? / ///' s— —AOCAL FLOOD PLAIN 3 ..- / ELEVAIION = 908.1 9, -.2:, / 49i // X5.6 \ „. / , '—',7 ."4' 0 Z ' V, / 7,,,,........._ Xt ,....„; "1 / / / \ . / / // k/' \ / / \ / / ---- I ' ' • — ,.. ..—... . ... . : „. „ \ , J6" „.. k6, -___._..... 1 ==1.9r.F.7-77-.7T-LlE -F.In--.-777.:Tir9V.,-4;':=-9E=:EL44*.g56frorpER u N — _______ -- - \ ...-- --- --- / _2_51L., — -7 / ' ''" X\/ // / 2 9 1 u X 919 1 0 r . evorrooete°5.440,14:- .k.orirdsr• 4V/,r .1" 1"1 980 . N s% 5y X 6 9 / / 6 X " X 918 3 81 71 LEGEND • • PROPERTY LINE SETBACK ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK EXISTING CONTOURS LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION TREE PROTECTION FENCE GENERAL NOTES TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 211 1ST STREET NORTH, SUITE 350 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55401 t 612 345 4275 1. SEE SHEET U301 FOR GENERAL NOTES. 2. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR BUILDING INFO. 3. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR, MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR, AND IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE W/ PAVING, CONCRETE, AND WALL CONTRACTORS ON SLEEVE LOCATIONS UNDER DRIVEWAYS, WALKS, AND WALLS. 4. REFER TO SHEET L010 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN FOR BOUNDARY INFORMATION. ALL CONSTRUCTION STAKING MUST BE PERFORMED BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR. 5. DO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGS. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ARE TO BE USED FOR ALL LAYOUT WORK. B. TIE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY LAYOUT DISCREPANCIES. 7. ALL SITE ELEMENTS MALL BE STAKED IN TIE HELD AND APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTOR. B. AUTOCAD FILE AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTOR UPON REQUEST FOR FIELD LAYOUT. BACH-HARTLEY RESIDENCE 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE, EDINA, MN The designs shown and deserted herein includwg at technbal Marinas, graphics and spectcations thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied, duplcaled or convnercialy exploited, 0 hbek or 0 part, wiJnout the eipress written parnission of Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. These are available for In lled review and evaluation by cleric, consultants, contractors. governement agencies. and vendors 0* 0 accordance will this make. 0 Copyright 2021 Travis Van beret Stud., LLC. Al rights reserved. I hereby tardy that this plan, speceicabon, or report was prepared by me or under my dee et supembien and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Ardmtect under the laws of the Stale et Minnesota. TRAVIS VAN LIERE kense no, 43728 date, 05/2021 NOTE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Rev I alienation Dale ISSUED FOR VAPJANCE 05.052021 9 9 V B g„ 0 KEYNOTES 1. EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE(S) TTP. -SAVE AND PROTECT 2. EXISTING NEIGHBORING PROPERTY/SITE FEATURE - SAVE MU PROTECT 3. EXISTING CITY STREET/ALLEY - SAVE AND PROTECT, REPAIR ANY DAMAGED AREAS PER CITY STANDARDS 4. EXISTING CITY SIDEWALK- SAVE AND PROTECT, REPAIR ANY DAMAGED AREAS PER CITY STANDARDS 5. PROJECT POINT OF BEGINNING 6. EXISTING POWER POLE, TYPICAL-SAVE AND PROTECT 0 SHEET NOTES 1. AGGREGATE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 2. TOPSOIL STOCKPILE AREA 3. TREE PROTECTION FENCE, TYPICAL 4. EROSION CONTROL FENCE, TYPICAL w SILT FENCE EXISTING FENCE POINT OF BEGINNING TRAFFIC FLOW ARROW SITE ELEMENT TO BE REMOVED 1 1 C)EXISTING TREE TO BE SAVED AND PROTECTED mut cow. wow /' 0 EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED KM COW. 0AW. REMOVAL KEY KEY I ocsuiwrew RI EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED R2 EXISTING HOUSE TO BE DEMOLISHED R3 EXISTING PAVER DRIVEWAY TO BE REMOVED R4 EXISTING PAVING TO BE REMOVED R5 EXISTING DECK TO BE REMOVED R6 EXISTING LANDSCAPE WALL TO BE REMOVED CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 ;,L,,NNING DEPARTMENT NEIGHBORING STRUCTURE Drawing EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALS PLAN spa DIRWIl By Date Scale, SW 51512021 1 6 6000001' @EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALS PLAN 16. Slee I L010 SCALE 1 Inch = 16 feel TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE GENERAL NOTES 1. SEE SHEET L001 FOR GENERAL NOTES. 2. REFER TO ARCIATECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR BUILDING INFO. 3. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR, MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR, ANO IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WI PAVING, CONCRETE, AND WALL CONTRACTORS ON SLEEVE LOCATIONS UNDER DRNEWAYS, WALKS, AND WALLS. 4. REFER TO SHEET L0113- EXISTING CONDMONS PLAN FOR BOUNDARY INFORMATION. ALL CONSTRUCTION STAKING MUST BE PERFORMED BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR. 5. DO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGS. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ARE TO BE USED FOR ALL LAYOUT WORK. S. TFE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY LAYOUT DISCREPANCIES. 7. ALL SITE ELEMENTS SHALL BE STAKED IN TIE FIELD AND APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MCA TO CONSTRUCTION. 8. AUTOCAD FILE AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTOR UPON REQUEST FOR FIELD LAYOUT. 211 1ST STREET NORTH, SUITE 350 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 I 612 345 4275 0 KEYNOTES 1. EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE(S) TYP. -SAVE AND PROTECT 2. EXISTING NEIGHBORING PROPERTY/SITE FEATURE -SAVE AM) PROTECT 3. EXISTING CITY STREET/ALLEY - SAVE AM) PROTECT, REPAIR ANY DAMAGED AREAS PER CITY STANDARDS 4. EXISTING CITY SIDEWALK- SAVE AND PROTECT, REPAIR ANY DAMAGED AREAS PER CITY STANDARDS 5. PROJECT POINT OF BEGINNING 6. EXISTING POWER POLE, TYPICAL - SAVE AM) PROTECT CI • 00(0 x O 0 0 0 --i5; ,4150" N - pioo r Av ornecr- r -rair wAIRoo c: 1 11 0 SHEET NOTES ..- /at. , \ / i . s'>____./7 \ \ t \ / `). I v-/ \ 1 ''' 74" _ • X - - 11_0 , _ -,...----„__...-...„ - • - , 1. ALLOWED TREE REMOVAL ENVELOPE 2, CRITICAL ROOT ZONE, TYPICAL 3. TREE PROTECTION FENCE, TYPICAL 4. EROSION CONTROL FENCE, TYPICAL LEGEND CITY OF EDINA PROPERTY LINE SETBACK ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK EXISTING CONTOURS snw LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION a a a TREE PROTECTION FENCE SILT FENCE EXISTING FENCE POINT OF BEGINNING TRAFFIC FLOW ARROW INFER sof, TO.P.f MAY 0 7 2021 6 ,o ig GARAGE o FEE: 922.00 I OEM PROPOSED HOUSE FFE: 922.50 BFFE: 912.25 / PLANNING DEPARTMENT 47----- ' 7 - TO / 1 2 //- / 2 Ds co T. ' PS /6\- / / 2 WIZE fLO: CONN • O EXISTING TREE TO BE SAVED AND PROTECTED // // /, 0 EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED OECD COW Of. BACH-HARTLEY RESIDENCE \ X I 1 I I C., 1 co47. / .S.• / : ‘--LNDCAL FLOOD PLAIN *- / / ,, ELEVADON = 908.1 2-- / --4.-- \/ / • / / 1 \ / I • TREE INVENTORY 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE, EDINA. MN PERE. OUTSOE PEEDECO DRIESOPE PROTECTED TIESCVAILE / X LE. IM•111 The designs shown and described he ren iickaldg at technics) drawings, graphics and speckatens thereof, are propisetary and cenrot be coped, dopicated or commerriely exploited, II whole or in pad, willout the express written pennesen of Travis Van Lire Skido, LLC. These are ankbas for kneed wow and evahiaton by slants, ronsuCeNs, contractors. governarnent agencies, and vendors ork it accordance wish Ks notice. 0411. OWN. COT. COM. CUTSME OUTSIDE CUTDDE WT. MOE 113CE ICOE OLRODE WEISE OUTROS OWS. MN. WT. WT. COT. C. ME TIMM OW. ONIEDE INSIDE MAX TOME EISOF ITDOE CUTS. WES. GUIS. OWE. anus WES. CAN. OMSGE OM. COTS. OWE. D.PLENDENNAI PROTECTED CESEASED MATEEPRICE PROTECTED WENSIMPRIECE RETCH.Elf NEN.. MOE SPRUCE DOUSED WOE SPOKE DEEMED MITE SPRUCE IP REHTEcTED TEEMED C Copyright 2021 Travis Von Liede Stuck. LLC. Al nights reserved. WIDE SLR. RED.. HEATON MITE SPRUCE R SMARM, HEMISTE CADDIE. PR ol ECT ED NEMETH EASS. PN WILT. SPACE PROTECTEO WNW' ANNESETEUTIAL PEOTECTED ENAMETTIEf PROTECTFO NERO. I I I I I I I I I I I 1;1 I 1 I LODELEDDIDEN ROKNESTE / \ .15 " ,.. --- -----) - - ;Y'=."=Fre=e '"/:4-=eeZ Fsit -Tgre i .40 "i. ..v.TY fralT/ CRL iTATEILEY 1 ' _- -- --- // i -- - - ANNE SFrer.T TT PR MAX ED WASP DIME CAS PROTECTED WASINY 10 RE PRESSEN. TO SE FRESERHED o RE RRESSWED TO RS DRESEWED TO tE ROWED. TO WM.. TO LE REVOTED TO TEED.. ID 6E MCC. TO MR.. TO SE MANED TO LE PREM.. TO ITE PRAMS. TO EE RDECVED TO Pt RETCVED TO EE R.0.0 TO TE PDC.° TO BE ROCWD TO EE PEWEE, TOOT IDA, ES 10 SE Pa,. TOLER.. TOM REWV. TOSE NEWVED TO 1E TWOFER TO TER.. TO 6E R.. MOWED TOR TO TE TONED.. TO SUMSERINO TORE INES.. TORE PRE... I hereby rertly that this plan, speck-Rion, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I ern a duly Licensed Landscape kclutect under the km of the State of Minnesota. PROTECTED IXASTES SVATIVIETEOES t .A.41.1VITE CAS PROTECTED PEWEES. TERME FRED.S VANE EDT ELLER POMO. INATTEN REDWIDLE ICATTNY EDIFIED/ O I DOENBSE TIF-MENT I EICVAPIA NEELLINI FETCYAKE WRETCH KREMER / FORPTIME NERillfr VIETE EFEWE TRAVIS VAN LIERE keno no: 43728 dater 51512021 FIXDOINA HEALTH / / PROTECTED WRENN SS. .111.11. PROTECTED NATION OMR DIECE 0 WITTESEICWE REOT ECT OUNOTOMPEN F OE WALT. CUIEMEASPOI FOCH/ TE.E WAIT. ONAIDDIENDI EDP/ADE ff OTEUID FUTON SEI1.11TE ...DUCTED. NOTE ER01 T PR TATTED RAF I. TINE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FEW.. NEMO. REIM. SEE WAIT. ROUE. F ESC. ME PT Rey I Descnkesn Date - ISSUED FOR VARIANCE W.052021 F EVVVA NEM. MDIUTED 11 OWE. DE WA MIT PROTECT E0 RDICHEILE MIME WCE RDICHABLE KAMA MEM, RECCE TOTAL NUMBER OF PROTECTED. HEALTHY TREES OUTSIDE OF ALLOWED REMOVAL ENVELOPE TO BE REMOVED: saw 5 IIOT E SEE L401 FOR TREE REPLACEMENT SCHECULE 3 DECIDEOLD Tsang TREE INVENTORY NEIGHBORING STRUCTURE BW 5,5,2021 I' = 16 0000001' Drawn By Date Scale 0) 0 8' 16. 37 OTREE INVENTORY Sheet. L011 SCALE 1 Inch =16 feet - • • •••• PROPERTY LINE SETBACK — mmo — ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK EXISTING CONTOURS — sent — LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION —x--a--x—TREE PROTECTION FENCE — — Si — — — SILT FENCE —4-4-4-4— EXISTING FENCE -4". POINT OF BEGINNING TRAFFIC FLOW ARROW POINT OF ENTRY AT BUILDING 0 EXISTING TREE TO BE SAVED 2 AND PROTECTED • 0 PROPOSED NEW TREE STAIR GAS METER WATER METER AIR CONDITIONER UNIT GENERATOR TRASH CONTAINER 0 KEYNOTES 1. EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE(S)1YP. -SAVE AND PROTECT 2. EXISTING NEIGHBORING PROPERTY/SITE FEATURE - SAVE AND PROTECT 3. EXISTING CITY STREET/ALLEY • SAVE AND PROTECT, REPAIR ANY DAMAGED AREAS PER CITY STANDARDS 4. EXISTING CITY SIDEWALK- SAVE AND PROTECT, REPAIR ANY DAMAGED AREAS PER CITY STANDARDS 5. PROJECT POINT OF BEGINNING 6. EXISTING POWER POLE, TYPICAL - SAVE AND PROTECT 0 SHEET NOTES 2. PROPuSEU H.JUSE I-002k kl,1 LEGEND 0 -1 0 1 , -1- 1- ACP _ _1 ) ' ,-- i 7 ...- .„, / ,:,, ,--- ,, - • .. ,---1 ( / mY l/ ' 101 SIDE YARD SETBACK \‘( \ \ / / ' \ / \ '\\ / \ ril ui tital it i o lli il i g iv e l lg o pj = R. pi eel \ PROPI OSFD HOUSE FEE 922.50 BFFE: 912.25 "roil III II 0oin&. i&M M- 1 .jam I! LAVA MOH OHW: 907.60 I POND ( / , / / , ,/ ); awn / \ L 1 / , / ICI , / 4' /ji,/ / X , 4,,- „ <-' , , / ,/ A , ‘\ ., / r, -L,OCAL FLOOD PLAIN PLEVA170N = 908.1 /41 / A 51 / 11111111111111111111111 CEUE••=1:11 0 • •,••••••• • • • • .Z • • • ::„T • • • • — • 10,— • • • • • • ...-PROPERIY \ • - - — — \\ GENERAL NOTES TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO 1. 2. SEE SHEET L001 FOR GENERAL NOTES. REFER TO ARCFITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR BUILDING INFO. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 3. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR, MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR, MO IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WI PAVING, CONCRETE, AND WALL CONTRACTORS ON SLEEVE 211 1ST STREET NORTH, SUITE 350 MINNEAPOLIS, IAN 55401 LOCATIONS UNDER DRIVEWAYS, WALKS, AND WALLS. 612 345 4275 4. REFER TO SHEET LORD- EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN FOR BOUNDARY INFORMATION. ALL CONSTRUCTION STAKING MUST BE PERFORMED BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR. 5. DO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGS. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ARE TO BE USED FOR ALL LAYOUT WORK. 6. TEE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY LAYOUT DISCREPANCIES. 7. ALL SITE ELEMENTS SIMI BE STAKED IN THE FIELD AND APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 8. AUTOCAD FILE AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTOR UPON REQUEST FOR FIELD LAYOUT. CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACH-HARTLEY RESIDENCE 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE, EDINA, MN The designs shown and described herein including a techntal tharrisgs, grapNcs and spec/Catkins thereof, are pmplietary and cannot be copbd, dupIcated or commechly exploited, in whole or in part, wthout the express wrAen penissisn of Travis Van Lbre Studb, LW. These are available for lensed teview and evaluatisn by cleNs. consultar/s, contractors, governemenl agencies, and vendors only is accordance vrth this nonce. C CopyrigN 2021 Travis Van Owe Study, LLC. Al lights Teemed. I hereby caddy that Ahs plan, specification. or report was prepared by me or under wry drect superrhion and that I em a duly Licensed Landscape Archject under the laws of the State of Minnesota. TRAVIS VAN LIERE kense 110 43728 date: 5/3/2021 NOTE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Rey K Uescophsn - ISSUED FOR VARIANCE Dale 05.052021 . _ NEIGHBORING STRUCTURE Dravnng SITE LAYOUT PLAN OS1TE LAYOUT PLAN Drawn By Date Stale Sheet BW SIB/2021 1-e 16.0000001' L101 0 O 0 POND OHW. 907.60 922.00 ' • • 6% 520.50+ a vv. ' 209 di d 918.682 910.33 „„-- ,% / / • / / 75 919.83 -rw:gleilingems.um IL *All ildt: , PROPOSED 6111 11 HOUSE krtIVI BFFE_: 912.25 FFE: 922.50 •1%. 411111i1 5 t , t 1 OS - of re-t2.- ?ESRD I I i \ 911.58 \ TOW / \ 912;004, TOW. 91790 BOW. 911.50 11117211:1 1=105 ii 0 +92209 92200 61 901 15 00 10 A SETBACK-- _III >n x )11 • • -PROPERTY LINE7Y NEIGHBORING STRUCTURE P 910 e+ If/ 11111111111111111111111 CEEK•111" 0 0 EL U C o •dcT O / F iy / X , /,; 7 / s--LNOCAL FLOOD PLAIN ELEVATION = 908.1 95108 TOW- 1151 91200 , 1115010. 11110. \ 101116 TOW . 8 ( TOW. 926.00 IX avc NS Si! No NI a = 4=4, BOW921.75 .17 a 4 a- -54 -a- C • • 1 MN/SEA , 11 GARAGE FFE: 922.00 92233 ro 522_65 005, 02.33 TPS 922 33 TOS TOW. 917.00 BOW q SHEET NOTES 1. EXISTING HOUSE FOOTPRINT 2. PROPOSED HOUSE FOOTPRINT LEGEND - • • PROPERTY LINE SETBACK - oiav - ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK EXISTING CONTOURS PROPOSED CONTOURS PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION SLOPE-AT.SURFACE / DRAINAGE FLOW ARROW LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION TREE PROTECTION FENCE SILT FENCE -8-8-•-•- EXISTING FENCE POINT OF BEGINNING Irac't . TRAFFIC FLOW ARROW POINT OF ENTRY AT BUILDING Ss V GENERAL NOTES TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 211 1ST STREET NORTH, SUITE 350 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 1 512 345 4275 1. SEE SHEET 1001 FOR GENERAL NOTES. 2. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR BIALDING INFO. 3. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR. MECHANICAL CONTMCTOR, AND IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE W/ PAVING, CONCRETE, AND WALL CONTRACTORS ON SLEEVE LOCATIONS UNDER DRIVEWAYS, WALKS, AND WALLS. 4. REFER TO SHEET L010- EXISTING COMJITIONS PLAN FOR BOUNDARY INFORMATION. ALL CONSTRUCTION STAKING MUST BE PERFORMED BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR. 5. CO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGS. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ARE TO BE USED FOR ALL LAYOUT WORK. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY LAYOUT DISCREPANCIES. 7. ALL SITE ELEMENTS SHALL BE STAKED IN THE FIELD AND APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHTECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCT/ON. 8. AUTOCAD FILE AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTOR UPON ROSIEST FOR FIELD LAYOUT. 0 KEYNOTES 1. EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE(S) TYP. -SAVE AND PROTECT 2. EXISTING NEIGHBORING PROPERTY/SITE FEATURE -SAVE AID PROTECT 3. EXISTING CITY STREET/ALLEY- SAVE ANO PROTECT. REPAIR ANY DAMAGED AREAS PER CITY STANDARDS 4. EXISTING CITY SIDEWALK- SAVE AND PROTECT, REPAIR ANY DAMAGED AREAS PER CITY STANDARDS 5. PROJECT POINT OF BEGINMNG B. EXISTING POWER POLE, TYPICAL-SAVE AND PROTECT 0 EXISTING TREE TO BE SAVED AND PROTECTED 0 PROPOSED NEW TREE °corn cross OFWV. On STAIR GAS METER WATER METER : AIR CONDITIONER UNIT 1-,4 GENERATOR TRASH CONTAINER O O CATCH BASIN, ROOF DRAIN, OR AREA DRAIN ot.t POP-UP EMITTER DRAIN TILE CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACH-HARTLEY RESIDENCE 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE, EDINA, MN The clesIgns shown and descrbed herein tanking al technUal drawings, graphics and space-cations thereof, are proprietary and cannot be road, dupkated or cornmeroilly eaplaled, n Mock or in part, weaut the evpress vereten permission of Travis Van Ltere Studio, LLC. These are avalabie for Irruted review and evaluation by okras, consulants, contrxtors, governement agencies, and vendors orgy n accordance wilt this notice. Cosynght 2021 Travis Van Liars Studo, LLC. Al nghts rose wed. I here/ certify But DR plan, speoVicaton, or report was prepared by me or under my drool supervision and that I am a dray Licensed Landscape Arohaect under the laws of the State of 1Anneso5. TRAVIS VAN LIERE kense no, 43728 date, 4122/2021 NOTE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Rev Desorption Date ISSUED FOR VARIANCE 05.05.2021 Drawing GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN O Drawn By BW Date: 51312021 Soak. 1 -=16.0000001' OGRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN 8' 168 32' Ebi Sheol. SCALE 1 nch v 15 feel L201 U- -923 _____ .1 a .c ; „„srv_cr, L 0 KEYNOTES EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE(S) TYP. -SAVE AND PROTECT 2. EXISTING NEIGHBORING PROPERTY/SITE FEATURE -SAVE AM) PROTECT 3. EXISTING CITY STREET/ALLEY - SAVE AM) PROTECT, REPAIR ANY DAMAGED AREAS PER CITY STANDARDS 4. EXISTING CITY SIDEWAIX - SAVE MO PROTECT, REPAIR ANY DAMAGED AREAS PER CITY STANDARDS 5. PROJECT POINT OF BEGINNING S. EXISTING POWER POLE, TYPICAL - SAVE AND PROTECT 0 SHEET NOTES 1. BUILDING OVERHANG. TYP.- SEE ARCH. DINGS. 2. PERGOLA OVERHEAD, SEE ARCH. OWLS. 3. ARCHITECTURAL COLUMN-SEE ARCH. DAMS. 4. BUILT IN BENCH-SEE ARCH. DAMS. 5. WALL BY ARCHITECT-SEE ARCH. DINGS. 6. OUTDOOR FIREPLACE-SEE ARCH. DINGS. LEGEND PROPERTY LINE SETBACK - cr-w - ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK EXISTING CONTOURS POINT OF BEGINNING rt,( TRAFFIC FLOW ARROW POINT OF ENTRY AT BUILDING EXISTING TREE TO BE SAVED MO PROTECTED COtW''. mar CD 0 PROPOSED NEW TREE MC. OAM STAIR GAS METER WATER METER AIR CONDITIONER UNIT I Al GENERATOR PLANT SCHEDULE TREES CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACH-HARTLEY RESIDENCE 5 404 STAUDER CIRCLE, EDINA, MN The designs shown and described heran inckwirwg a/ technical drawims, graphics and spectcatims thereof. are proprietary and cannot be copied, dupkated or commercialy exploited, h whole or to part wihod the express written permission of Travis Van Liere 5540, LLC. These are ave table for tented review and eyaluatan by ckr4a, consultants, contractors, government agenchs, and vekbrs 041 is accordance vrth Urs noke. rits AB Ai Coping. 2021 Tram Van Liere Stark, LLC. Al nghts reserved. Abbe bakamea BALSAM FIR 17 EA 12' HT. BB Amelandliet a gra Mille. 'Autumn AG Mance' AUTUMN BRILUMCE SERVICEBERRY Aker saccharum 'Green Mountain' GREEN MOUNTAIN SUGAR MAPLE P111.6 PO. 0tam 'Glen's Form' CHANTICLEER PEAR T EA. 1 8 0 . - 8 12' , ,, H s T 6 EA. trit e • 4 EA. j r CAL- BM. SS I hereby certify that this plan, spechcakn, or report was prepared by me or order my drect supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Archtect under the taws of the State of Minnesota. AS PC NOTE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Revs ieknpbon - ISSUED FOR VARIANCE Dale 05052021 - 5 u GENERAL NOTES TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO 1. 2. SEE SHEET1001 FOR GENERAL NOTES. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAININGS FOR BLALDING INFO. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 3. ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR, MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR, MO IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE WI PAVING, CONCRETE, MO WALL CONTRACTORS ON SLEEVE 211 1ST STREET NORTH, SUITE 350 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55401 LOCATIONS UNDER DRIVEWAYS, WALKS, AND WALLS. 612 345 4275 4. REFER TO SHEET L010- EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN FOR BOUNDARY INFORMATION. ALL CONSTRUCTION STAKING MUST BE PERFORMED BY A REGISTERED LANG SURVEYOR. 5. DO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGS. MITTEN DIMENSIONS ARE TO BE USED FOR ALL LAYOUT WORK. 6. TFE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY LAYOUT DISCREPANCIES. 7. ALL SITE ELEMENTS SHALL BE STAKED IN TIE FIELD AND APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ft AUTOCAD FILE AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTOR UPON REQUEST FOR FIELD LAYOUT. POND OHW: 907.60 a TI LT, S RD grejlis-sji'dall4gr1441141---4frel::::.:14".°1°I.46 cif -14"11IFFE:111922h.5011 '41,17EIF3PC'C -1111111111111111111B—;E: 912.25 HOUSE \ / / \ / \ I .• c., I ,,,,r / .3 .... / ..... l .3. 1 / ...... ! -- — /-- .-- "-- j ,1 / / , / i \ .., ,• /— /I 7'-- — ..," ll • ' _ .... • • • • •••••• • , 72— • • .— • • .— • •i_4•... • • — • • .—.. • • •—PROPERTY LINE—..) q ..- / / O a 1// 11111111111111111111111111111111 / / // .- I / 0 / c? (// / 4-' /A / 157' ' A ‘ / / • "A" A A A A ‘--WCAL FLOOD PLAIN ECEVA170N = 908.1 41 // \\4 10 SETBACK:— — • • — fr f No 111 • / , ul TRAVIS VAN LIERE kense no. 43728 dater 5/5/2021 NEIGHBORING STRUCTURE PLANTING PLAN Down By Date Scale 5.5,2021 1" = 16 00000D1' PLANTING PLAN 32 Sheet L401 SCALE 1 Inch =16 feel 1 2:1 50% SLOPE (H V) loo.1 ix sal 2% 25:1 4% 20:1 5% 17:1 6% 12.5:1 8% 10.1 10% 5.1 20% 4:1 25% 3.1 33% SILT FENCE STORAGE EQUALS 2 FT SILT FENCE STORAGE EQUALS SWOMUM SLOPE FOR A VIEAR EVENT OAT FT FORA' 2 FT FORA 100-YEAR EVENT LENGTH 100-YEAR EVENT 400 FT NO FT 100 FT 200 FT 450 FT 75 FT 100 FT 225 FT 75 FT BO FT 180 FT 75-50 67 FT 150 FT SOFT SO FT 112 FT 50 FT 40 FT BO FT 50-25 FT 20 FT 45 FT 25-15 FT 16 FT 36 FT 15 FT 12 FT 27 FT 15 FT 8 FT 18 FT 15 FT EXTEND MATERIAL ABOUT 40' ON TOP OF THE GROUND AND RANDOMLY INSERT STAPLES THROUGH THE MATERIAL ABOUT 20* APART STAPLES AT 3'0.C. STAPLES MUST BE INSERTED THROUGH OVERLAP MATERIAL TRANSVERSE SEAMS: BLANKET MATERIAL MUST OVERLAP AT LEAST 6. AND STAPLES INSERTED THROUGH BOTH FABRICS ATA MAXIMUM SPACING OF 20. APART LONGITUDINAL SEAMS BLANKET MATERIAL MUST OVERLAP AT LEAST 6. AND STAPLES INSERTED THROUGH BOTH FABRICS AT A MAXIMUM SPACING OF 40. APART AT END OF SLO ECURE BLANKET MATERIAL BY INSERTINGSTARES ABOUT 20' APART THROUGH THE FABRIC 1. BEFORE INSTALLATION APPLY TOPSOIL, FERTILIZER AND SEED TO SURFACE 2. BEGIN AT THE TOP OF THE CHANNEL. INSTALL MATS BY ANCHORING IN A6. DEEP BY 6- WIDE TRENCH WITH APPROXIMATELY 12. OF MAT EXTENDED BEYOND THE UP-SLOPE PORTION OF THE TRENCH. ANCHOR WITH A ROW OF STAPLES APPROXIMATELY 12' APART IN THE BOTTOM OF THE TRENCH. BACKFILL AND COMPACT THE TRENCH AFTER STAPLING. APPLY SEED TO COMPACTED SOIL AND FOLD REMAINING 12' PORTION OF MAT BACK OVER SEED AND SOIL SECURE MATS WITH A WITH A ROW OF STAPLES SPACED APPROXIMATELY I2. APART ACROSS THE WIDTH OF THE MATS. 3. ROLL CENTER MATS IN DIRECTION OF WATER FLOW IN BOTTOM OF CHANNEL 4. PLACE CONSECUTIVE AND ADJACENT MATS END OVER END (SHINGLE STYLE) WITH A MINIMUM 6' OVERLAP. USE A DOUBLE ROW OF STAPLES STAGGERED 4' APART AND 4. ON CENTER TO SECURE OVERLAPPED MATS. 5. FULL LENGTH EDGE OF MATS AT TOP OF SIDE SLOPES MUST BE ANCHORED WITH A ROW OF STAPLES APPROXIMATELY 12' APART W A 6' DEEP BY 6' WIDE TRENCH. 6. THE TERMINAL END OF MATS MUST BE ANCHORED WITH A ROW OF STAPLES APPROXIMATELY 12' APART W A 6. DEEP BY 6' WIDE TRENCH. 7. BACKFILL MD SEED AFTER STAPLING. B. FOLLOW MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROPER INSTALLATION. 2' WASHED COURSE AGGREGATE, 12' 'DICK, OVER GEOFABRIC NOTES: 1. EROSION CONTROL BLANKET TO BE CATEGORY 4-COCONUT 25 FOR SLOPES GREATER THAN 5:1 AND SIDES AND BOTTOM OF ALL DRAINAGE SWALES AND PONDING AREAS AND CATEGORY 2-STRAW 2S FOR ALL SLOPES LESS THAN SI PER MNDOT SPEC. SECTION 3885. 2. INSTALL PER MNDOT SPEC. SECTION 2575 ®EROSION CONTROL BLANKET INSTALLATION EROSION CONTROL MAT INSTALLATION °GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE DETAIL SCALE: WA SCALE WA SCALE: NM DRAWINGS/2. VARIANCE-SET/L809-TREE PROTECTION AND EROSION CONTROL DETAIL lowl.r/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (DROPBOX)/BACH-HARTLEY RESIDENCE/2. DWG/ 1. ALL TREE PROTECTION FENCING AND EROSION CONTROL FENCING SHALL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO THE PLANS PRIOR TO ANY DEMOLITION. AFTER DEMOLITION OR AS NECESSARY. TREE PROTECTION FENCING MAY BE RELOCATED WITH APPROVAL FROM THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. ALL TREE PROTECTION FENCING AND EROSION CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. 2. TREE PROTECTION FENCING SHALL CONSIST OF TEMPORARY METAL WIRE CHAIN LINK MESH FENCING OR APPROVED EQUAL. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT STORE ANY MATERIALS OR PARK ANY VEHICLES IN TREE PROTECTION ZONES. THE FENCE SHALL PREVENT TRAFFIC MOVEMENT AND THE PLACEMENT OF TEMPORARY FACILITIES. EQUIPMENT, STOCKPILES AND SUPPLIES FROM HARMING VEGETATION WITHIN THE LIMITS OF PROTECTION. 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEANLY CUT ALL ROOTS EXPOSED BY GRADING AS DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL USE DESIGNATED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AND STAGING AREAS. ®TREE PROTECTION FENCING INSTALLATION SCALE: WA 3' MINIMUM 6' IDEAL FROM DRIPLINE PLAN VIEW 6' MAX -I- NOTES: RAN VIEW MAXIMUM 25' ON ONE SIDE OR 33% OF TOTAL ROOT SYSTEM ROOT PRUNING LIMITS BASE OF TREE GROUND PLANE NO MORE THAN HALF THE CROWN OF THE TREE 1. PRUNING CUT, TYP PER ARBORIST RECOMMENDATIONS ROOT ZONE (ID ROOT PRUNING DETAIL SCALE WA ID MIN LENGTH PRE-DRILLED HOLES WEDGE OR MY STAKE 0.5./(0.5- OPENING IN NET SOIL COR LOG 6,7" MINIMUM DLAMETER INSTALL SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH (MNDOT TYPE 6). EQUIVALENT MATERIAL MAY BE SUBSTITUTED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE ENGINEER. oIT STAKE DRIVEN THROUGH LOG MESH L6-8 WIRE MESH REINFORCEMENT, DESIGN 1 SECTION 3886 61. ATTACH FABRIC TO WIRE MESH RECOMMENDATIONS 1MTH HOG RINGS, PER MNDOT SPEC. 1. SILT FENCES SHOULD BE INSTALLED ON THE CONTOUR (AS OPPOSED TO UP AND DOWN A HILL) AND CONSTRUCTED SO THAT FLOW CANNOT BYPASS THE ENDS. 2. ENSURE THAT THE DRAINAGE AREA IS NO GREATER THAN 114 ACRE PER 100 FT OF FENCE. 3. MAKE THE FENCE STABLE FOR THE 10-YEAR PEAK STORM RUNOFF. 4. WHERE ALL RUNOFF IS TO BE STORED BEHIND E THE SILT FENCE, THAT THE MIN MAXIMUM SLOPE LENGTH BEHIND THE FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED THE SPECIFICATIONS SHOWN IN TABLE FIGURE 1: TYPICAL INSTALLATION FOR SILT FENCE TABLE 1: MAXIMUM SLOPE LENGTH AND SLOPE FOR WHICH SILT FENCE IS APPLICABLE BY CALCULATION BY CALCULATION BY ACCEPTED DESIGN PRACTICES 0 SILT FENCE INSTALLATION SCALE WA METAL (OR WOOD) POST OR STAKE DIRECTION OF RUNOFF FLOW f SILT FENCE FABRIC FABRIC ANCHORAGE TRENCH BACKFILL WITH TAMPED NATURAL SOIL NATURAL SOIL NOTE SILT FENCE SHALL FOLLOW MNDOT SPEC. SECTION 3886. Q BIOLOG INSTALLATION SCALE: WA TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 211 1ST STREET NORTH, SUITE 350 MINNEAPOLIS, IAN 55401 I 612 345 4775 CITY OF EDINA MAY 0 7 2021 PLANN:.AG DEPARTMENT BACH-HARTLEY RESIDENCE 5404 STAUDER CIRCLE, EDINA, MN The desbris shown and described herein includ ng al lechnial drawings, graphics and speceScabons !hereof, are proprietary and cannot be coped, du*ated or commercialy exploited, in whole or in part, without the express written perrnSsion of Travis Van Lire Studio, LLC. These are awe Table far Imited review and evakiaban by dents, consultants, conbactors, government age Nee, and vendors only in accordance with this mks. Copyrighl 2021 Travis Van Live Studo, RC. AI rights reserved. I hereby certfy that OM plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my &sot supervision and theism a duly Licensed Landscape Archikt under the laws MR Slate of Minnesota. TRAVIS VAN LIERE kense no: 43728 date: 11125021 N,TE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Revi Oesenpbon Data , ISSUED FOR VARIANCE 05552021 Dramg EROSION CONTROL AND TREE PROTECTION DETAILS Drawn By. BW Date. 420'2021 SCA' N'A Sheet. L609 Date: June 23, 2021 Agenda Item #: V.B. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Emily Bodeker, As s is tant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:B-21-19: S ign Variance to allow an additional 38.2 s quare foot building s ign at T he Bower, 3650 Hazelton R oad 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 the variance to allow for an additional 38.2-foot wall sign on the east elevation of 3650 Hazelton R oad. I N TR O D U C TI O N: AT TAC HME N T S: Description Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report 6-17-21 Noon Staff Report Applicant Submittal Aerial Map Additional Proposed Signs-not included in variance reques t Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 16 June 2021 Public Hearing Comments-3650 Hazelton Road Better Together Edina Project: Public Hearing: Sign Variance to allow an additional 38.2 square foot building sign on the east elevation of The Bower at 3650 Hazelton Road No Responses VISITORS 1 CONTRIBUTORS 0 RESPONSES 0 0 Registered 0 Unverified 0 Anonymous 0 Registered 0 Unverified 0 Anonymous The applicant, Sean Sowder, SDDI Signs, is requesting a sign variance for an additional wall sign at The Bower, 3650 Hazelton Road. 3650 Hazelton Road is located on the north side of Hazelton Road, just west of the promenade. The proposed 38.2 square foot building sign is located on the east elevation of the building. The proposed sign is in addition to the allowable 12 square foot building sign that is proposed on the south elevation and the 24 square foot monument sign. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Brandon Square Mall; zoned PCD-3, Planned Commercial District, and guided Community Activity Center Easterly: The Promenade and Target, zoned PCD-3 and guided Community Activity Center Southerly: Think Bank zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development, and guided Community Activity Center Westerly: Rue de France Commercial Building; zoned PCD-3, Planned Commercial District, and guided Community Activity Center Existing Site Features The subject property is 1.25 acres and is the site of an 18 story, 185 dwelling unit apartment building that is currently under construction. June 23, 2021 PLANNING COMMISSION Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner B-21-19, Sign variance to allow an additional 38.2 square foot building sign at The Bower at 3650 Hazelton Road Information / Background: STAFF REPORT Page 2 Planning Guide Plan designation: Community Activity Center Zoning: PUD, Planned Unit Development Compliance Table PUD allows signs permitted in the PRD, Planned Residence District PRD Sign Regulations Type Maximum Number Maximum Area Maximum Height Building identification (Wall sign on South Elevation) One per building 12 square feet 6 feet Area identification (Monument Sign) One per development 24 square feet 6 feet Proposed Sign 38.2 square feet* *Requires a variance PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues Is the proposed variance justified? Yes, Staff believes the requested sign variance is justified. 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 the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. STAFF REPORT Page 3 The subject property allows for signage that more fits the size and scale of the building on which it is located. The additional sign will help identify the building for cars that are traveling south bound on Hazelton Road, entering the round-a-bout. The proposed additional 38.2 square foot sign on the east elevation is reasonable on an 18-story building. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created? The proposed signage fits the size and scale of the building on which it is located and has minimal impact on surrounding neighborhoods. The subject property is located in the Southdale District with many commercial, residential and mixed-use buildings. The proposed signage is more similar to signage allowed on surrounding properties. The sign on the east elevation of the building will help with visibility and wayfinding for cars travelling southbound on Hazelton Road approaching the round-a-bout. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The location and size of the proposed sign will have limited impact to the surrounding properties and Southdale District. The additional proposed sign fits the size and scale of the building. Staff Recommendation Approve the requested variance to allow for an additional 38.2-foot wall sign on the east elevation of 3650 Hazelton Road based on the following findings: 1. The criteria for the proposed sign variance is met. The proposed signage will have limited impact on surrounding neighborhoods and fits within the size and scale of the building. 2. The practical difficulty is the size and scale of the building. One 12 square foot wall sign on an eighteen-story building does not match the scale of the building or provide adequate signage. 3. The proposed signage will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The site must be developed and maintained in conformance with the following plans: • Sign plans and elevations date stamped June 1, 2021. 17125 ADELMANN ST. SE PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372 P 952-224-9906 F. 952-224-9909 sddisignsystems.com Define your image. CITY OF EDINA May 17, 2020 JUN 0 1 2021 The Bower, Variance Application answers: PLANNING DEPARTMENT 3650 Hazleton Road, Edina Relive practical difficulties in complying with zoning ordinance and the use is reasonable? We believe that having the additional lit sign on the East Canopy of the building will help visitors and future tenants find and navigate the west bound entrance. Identifying the building long before approaching the roundabout will aid in the decision to turn right. Due to the setback of 20 feet from the street to the monument face. It now has to be to parallel to the roundabout, which makes it harder to see the entrance until you are right upon it. This makes the Lettering on the east end of the building more important to new visitors and the community. Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district? Due to the unique site lines of the building located on a roundabout and the building tight to the city bike path, the need to have the building identification at a lower site line is critical. Approaching traffic from the east will aid in knowing The Bower is coming up on the right as you go west on Hazelton, this reduces the chance of missing the right turn in off the roundabout. Plus Identifies the building. Be in Harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance? The Bower Edina will be the only name on the building, we feel the east end is the best place for this because the monument which is parallel to the roundabout (Because of 20 ft setbacks) will catch east bound traffic and the lettering on the canopy will catch west bound traffic. The lettering is a smaller set of soft halo lit lettering but larger than code. (38.22 sq/ft) We do feel having Edina makes the Bower part of the community. Not Alter the essential Character of a neighborhood? Having the lettering on the east side of the building will fit within the rest for the neighborhood. Many buildings and stores along Hazelton and the bike path have nice pedestrian friendly signage that isn't over powering for the building, we feel the size and simplicity of soft halo lit lettering will add to the walk way experience and elegantly identify the building. S. Sowder M Pr a o n je a c g t er: Revised Date: Drawn By: K. Svec Revision By: q Approved As Is x Approved 1-1 Please Change 1--I With Changes L—I and Resubmit WIRING IN AIR SPACE BETWEEN WALL AND SIDING 1/2" STEEL TOP HAT W/ AIR SPACE ALUMINUM SIDING STAINLESS STEEL FACED HALO-LIT CHANNEL LETTER ' 1 3 1 / 2" TRANSFORMER BOX PRE-FAB CONCRETE WALL 5/16"THREADED ROD EPDXY INTO CONCRETE WALL 5/16" THREADED ROD EPDXY INTO PLYWOOD 8 1/2" 51 3/8" 172" ELECTRICAL 3/4" PLYWOOD 32" TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE: 38.222 sq ft "THE BOWER" SQUARE FOOTAGE: 16.125 sq ft 1/2" STEEL TOP HAT W/ AIR SPACE 3/4" PLYWOOD SIGN TYPE: BUILDING ID SCALE: 1:20 0 CHANNEL LETTERS 1 1/2" DEEP HALO LIT CHANNEL LETTERS WITH STAINLESS STEEL FACES NOTES STUD MOUNTED ALUMINUM SIDING STAINLESS STEEL FACE -II. TRANSFORMER BOX 1 1/2" KW! 5/16" THREADED ROD EPDXY INTO PLYWOOD 10 1 N . . NN•N C' \N 'N 'N\ 1 STAINLESS STEEL RETURNS 1/4" 0 DRAIN HOLES PRIMARY POWER TO LETTERS BY OTHERS 120 VOLTS CLEAR LEXAN BACK LED ILLUMINATION CITY OF EDINA JUN 01 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Project: Exterior Signage File Name: Building Signage.ai Client: The Bower Origin Date: 05.13.21 PLEASE EMAIL OR FAX YOUR APPROVAL BACK This drawing is the sole property of SDDISign Systems. All rights to use and/or reproduce are ;coerced. Actual dimensions may vary slightly due to practical limitations with fabrication. Photographic representations of the proposed signage are for presentation only and may net be lessee. Colors will be printed as is, unless a specific color (i.e. Pantone Number, Sherwin Williams, or hard sample) Is provided. www.sddlslgns.com P. 952-224-9906 I F. 952-224-9909 17125 ADELMANN ST. SE Define your image. PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372 Revised Date: Project Manager: S. Sowder Revision By: Drawn By: K. Svec in Approved 1-1 As Is 1-1 Approved q Please Change I-1 With Changes L-1 and Resubmit SIGN TYPE: BUILDING ID SCALE: 1:50 0 CHANNEL LETTERS 1 1/2" DEEP HALO LIT CHANNEL LETTERS WITH STAINLESS STEEL FACES NOTES STUD MOUNTED CITY OF EDINA JUN 0 1 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Project: Exterior Signage File Name: Building Signage.ai Client: The Bower Origin Date: 05.13.21 PLEASE EMAIL OR FAX YOUR A' • ;0\4. B CK x This drawing is the sole property of SD DI Sign Systems. All rights to use and/or reproduce are mewed. Actual dimensions may vary slightly due to practical limitations with fabrication. Photographic representations of the proposed signage ore for presentation only and may not be to scale. Colors will be printed as is, unless a specific color (I.e. Panton Number, Sherwin Wdliams, or hard sample) Is provided. www.sddisigns.com P.952-224-9906 I F.952-224-9909 17125 ADELMANN ST. SE Define your image. PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372 PLYWOOD BACKER PRE-FAB CONCRETE WALL BACKER LL THE BOWEIR A....."111111P1- EDINA ..• 66" THE BOWER EDINA NIGHT RENDERING 5 ••• r PO' 0 00. MP) I0 \-0 5461 O S. Sowder M Pr a o n je a c g t er: Drawn By: K. Svec Revised Date: Revision By: Approved I I As Is fl Approved 1-1 Please Change With Changes I and Resubmit CITY OF EDINA JUN 0 1 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Project: Exterior Signage File Name: Building Signage.ai Client: The Bower Origin Date: 05.13.21 PLEASE EMAIL OR FAX YOUR APPROVAL BACK x This drawing is the sole property of 1001Sign Systems.All rights to use and/or reproduce are reserved. Actual dimensions may vary slightly due to practical Imitations with fabrication. Photographic representations of the proposed signage are for presentation only and may not be to scale. Colors will be printed as is. unless a specific color (i.e. Panton Number. Sherwin Williams,or hard sample) is provided. www.sddIsIgns.com P.952-224-9906 I F. 952-224-9909 17125 ADELMANN ST. SE Define your image. PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372 0 6.65' • BLOCK 1 Dri it Underground Easement in Iaror _- of NIP per Doc. Ne. 1054487 Easement for Alba- Road Sidewalk. DIdillairl Uti ity purposes per Doc No. T05180092 0 19 too It(iibal,„/ 0 • kv . 0 rr Scenk end Open Space Ea. tr per Doo. No. 1 73 TI,r1 H .11 .-.1J.1.10LLL Ut \-o\-,C) HAZEL TON ROAD 0 0 LOT 4 FFE=071.85 LFE=.13.55.85 ulgrggrfAg4 CAN PY 70. p SceIrico eOrf0 space Easement per Doc. a la 728 SIGN LOCATION / ` 1 O Ed ina, Hennep in, MetroG IS, Edin a, Henn epin , MetroGIS | © WSB & Associates2013, © WSB & Associa tes 2013 36 50 Hazelton Road June 11, 202 1 1 in = 100 f t / A. PAINTED ALUMINUM FACE FABRICATED ALUMIUNUM MONUMENT FACE PAINTED NAVY BLUE (COLOR TBD), ATTACHES TO THE FRONT AND WRAPS AROUND THE TOP AND BACK. (LOGO ONLY ON FRONT) B. PUSH THRU LOGO HALO LIT PUSH THRU LOGO WITH 1/8” THICK STAINLESS STEEL FACES C. MONUMENT MONUMENT WITH ALUMINUM AND PLYWOOD FRAME, 6” WIDE ALUMINUM SIDING (COLOR: DARK CHERRY, CODE: 1404/01-733, RESIN: 2604, GLOSS: 10+/-5) APPLIED TO STEEL TOP HAT MOUNTING BRACKETS THAT ARE ATTACHED TO THE 3/4” PLYWOOD D. CONCRETE BASE CONCRETE BASE WITH 6” EXPOSED ABOVE GRADE CHANNEL LETTERS 1 1/2” DEEP HALO LIT CHANNEL LETTERS WITH STAINLESS STEEL FACES NOTES SIGN TYPE: MONUMENT SINGLE SIDED SCALE: 1:20 Exterior Signage The Bower S. Sowder K. Svec 06.08.21 M. Zubkova Project: Client: ProjectManager: Drawn By: Monument R1.ai 05.17.21 File Name: Revised Date: Origin Date: Revision By: X ApprovedAs Is ApprovedWith Changes Please Changeand Resubmit PLEASE EMAIL OR FAX YOUR APPROVAL BACK www.sddisigns.com P. 952-224-9906 | F. 952-224-9909 17125 ADELMANN ST. SE PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372 This drawing is the sole property of SDDI Sign Systems. All rights to use and/or reproduce are reserved. Actual dimensions may vary slightly due to practical limitations with fabrication. Photographic representations of the proposed signage are for presentation only and may not be to scale. Colors will be printed as is, unless a specific color (i.e. Pantone Number, Sherwin Williams, or hard sample) is provided. 3650 3650 Side View ADDRESS #’s 1/2” EMBEDDED BOLTS GRADE 3650 3650 ALUMINUM SIDING 3/4” THICK PLYWOOD STEEL TOP HAT MOUNTING BRACKET Side View STAINLESS STEEL RETURNS 1/4” Ø DRAIN HOLES LED ILLUMINATION CLEAR LEXAN BACK 5/16” THREADED ROD EPOXY INTO PLYWOOD STAINLESS STEEL FACE ALUMINUM SIDING TRANSFORMER BOX PRIMARY POWER TO LETTERS BY OTHERS 120 VOLTS 1/2” STEEL TOP HAT W/ AIR SPACE 3/4” PLYWOOD 6" 6" 6" 36" 6"D 24"96" 108" 6"6" 36" 12" 6" 12" 36" 24" 3/4” CONDUIT FOR ELECTRICAL 3/4” CONDUIT FOR ELECTRICAL 66" 87 1/4" 48" 72" 4 7/8" 60 3/8" 3 1/8" 18 1/4" 16" 15 7/8" A B C 72" 16" 20 5/8" 5 5/8" 27 7/8" 4” x 4” POST (2x) E 1/2” THICK 8” x 8” PLATE SIGN LOCATION Exterior Signage The Bower S. Sowder K. Svec Project: Client: ProjectManager: Drawn By: Monument.ai 05.17.21 File Name: Revised Date: Origin Date: Revision By: X ApprovedAs Is ApprovedWith Changes Please Changeand Resubmit PLEASE EMAIL OR FAX YOUR APPROVAL BACK www.sddisigns.com P. 952-224-9906 | F. 952-224-9909 17125 ADELMANN ST. SE PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372 This drawing is the sole property of SDDI Sign Systems. All rights to use and/or reproduce are reserved. Actual dimensions may vary slightly due to practical limitations with fabrication. Photographic representations of the proposed signage are for presentation only and may not be to scale. Colors will be printed as is, unless a specific color (i.e. Pantone Number, Sherwin Williams, or hard sample) is provided. 28’ 6”17’ 8” SIGN LOCATION Exterior Signage The Bower S. Sowder K. Svec Project: Client: ProjectManager: Drawn By: Monument.ai 05.17.21 File Name: Revised Date: Origin Date: Revision By: X ApprovedAs Is ApprovedWith Changes Please Changeand Resubmit PLEASE EMAIL OR FAX YOUR APPROVAL BACK www.sddisigns.com P. 952-224-9906 | F. 952-224-9909 17125 ADELMANN ST. SE PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372 This drawing is the sole property of SDDI Sign Systems. All rights to use and/or reproduce are reserved. Actual dimensions may vary slightly due to practical limitations with fabrication. Photographic representations of the proposed signage are for presentation only and may not be to scale. Colors will be printed as is, unless a specific color (i.e. Pantone Number, Sherwin Williams, or hard sample) is provided. Date: June 23, 2021 Agenda Item #: V.C . To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:Emily Bodeker, As s is tant C ity P lanner Item Activity: Subject:B-21-18: A 2.33-foot height variance to allow for a new 20' 4" detac hed garage at 4628 Bruce Avenue 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 2.33-foot height variance request to allow for a new 20' 4" tall, detached garage at 4628 B ruce Avenue. I N TR O D U C TI O N: T he applicants and property owners, John and T racie R ossman, are requesting a 2.33-foot height variance to allow for a new 20’ 4” detached garage at 4628 B ruce Avenue. 4628 Bruce Avenue is located in the Country C lub District, on the west side of B ruce Avenue, north of Country C lub R oad, and south of B ridge Street. YouTube L ink to J une 8, 2021 Heritage P reservation C ommission Meeting (As requested by applicant) AT TAC HME N T S: Description Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report 6-17-21 Noon Staff Report Engineering Memo Applicant Submittal Applicant Submittal Attachments 6-22-21 Applicant Narrative Submittal 6-23-21 Additional Information Submitted by Applicant June 16th & June 18th Aerial Map 2013-07 Ordinance Amendment Surrounding Garages Building Permit Plans DRAFT HPC Minutes June 8, 2021 Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 17 June 2021 Public Hearing Comments-4628 Bruce Ave Better Together Edina Project: Public Hearing: 2.33-foot height variance to allow a 20' 4" tall detached garage at 4628 Bruce Avenue VISITORS 1 CONTRIBUTORS 1 RESPONSES 2 0 Registered 0 Unverified 1 Anonymous 0 Registered 0 Unverified 2 Anonymous Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 11, 2021 13:00:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 11, 2021 13:00:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jennifer Dewing Q2.Address 4624 Bruce Ave. Q3.Comment Our neighbors, the Rossman’s, are doing a construction project on their property. I think it’s a demolition of their existing garage and putting up a new detached garage. I’m just leaving a message endorsing their plan and we have no problems at all with their construction project. We wish them good luck. We wanted to leave a voicemail on their behalf. Thank you. - Transcribed by City Staff (voicemail was received June 4, 2021 at 8:14 AM) Respondent No:2 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 10:15:12 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 10:15:12 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Todd Myers Q2.Address 4624 Casco Q3.Comment I approve of the garage height variance. I definitely would allow that. Thank you. The applicants and property owners, John, and Tracie Rossman, are requesting a 2.33-foot height variance to allow for a new 20’ 4” detached garage at 4628 Bruce Avenue. The property is located in the Country Club District, on the west side of Bruce Avenue, north of Country Club Road, and south of Bridge Street. The applicants were also required to receive a Certificate of Appropriateness through the Heritage Preservation Commission for the demolition and construction of a new detached garage. The Heritage Preservation Commission approved the COA request for a new detached garage with conditions at their June 8, 2021, meeting. The conditions include: • Two windows that are proportionate in size and style to the home are installed on the east elevation above the garage door opening. • A window or permanent architectural detail such as timbering be installed to the west elevation. • A permanent architectural detail (window, timbering, bump out, etc.) be installed on the north elevation of the proposed garage. • Window or permanent architectural detail added to the south elevation or move the door so that there is not a portion of wall that is undecorated longer than 16 feet. • Any changes to the proposed plans would require review from the Heritage Preservation Commission. • A date-built plaque is required to be installed on the new garage. • The maximum height for the garage is 18 feet or a variance needs to be approved by the Planning Commission for the height of the garage. The definition of building height was amended in 2013. The amendment to the definition was that building height was measured from average existing grade to the highest point of the structure. Prior to that change, building height was measured to the mid-point of the structure from proposed grade. The City was experiencing buildings, including detached buildings, getting taller and taller due to varying roof pitches. The ordinance for garage height measurement was changed to specifically address voiced concerns of residents June 23, 2021 PLANNING COMMISSION Emily Bodeker, Assistant City Planner B-21-18, a 2.33-foot height variance to allow for a new 20’ 4” tall, detached garage at 4628 Bruce Avenue Information / Background: STAFF REPORT Page 2 in the district and throughout Edina that detached garages were being built, (under the old code), with significant ridge heights that were not in character or within the intent of the zoning ordinance. The maximum allowed height did not change, it was how height was measured that changed. The applicant submitted information that they believed showed garages around the subject property, 4627 Casco Avenue and 4629 Casco Avenue, were built in excess of 18 feet. Staff checked the approved building permits for both garages, and both permits were approved complying with the 18-foot height requirement. Staff then asked the City’s Engineering Department to measure the height of the garages as built and confirmed both garages were under 18 feet. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single Unit residential homes 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 The subject property is .18 acres. The existing home on the subject property and was built in 1928 and is classified as a Tudor Revival style home in the Country Club District. The existing detached garage is oriented towards the north and is more centrally located in the rear yard. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North Side – Side yard West Side – Rear Yard 3 feet 3 feet 4 feet 4 feet Building Coverage Lots less than 9,000sf 30% 26.2% Building Height 18 feet or 1 ½ stories whichever is less 20 feet 4 inches* *Requires a variance STAFF REPORT Page 3 PRIMARY ISSUES & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issues Is the proposed variance justified? No. Staff does not believe that the variance criteria are met to justify a variance to allow a taller detached than allowed by City Code. 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 the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. Staff does not believe there is a practical difficulty that prevents reasonable use. The garage could be constructed with a maximum height of 18 feet to meet the zoning requirements. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self-created? The circumstances are created by the applicant. The maximum height for detached structures located entirely within a rear yard is the same on all residential properties throughout Edina. The garage could be designed and constructed to meet the height requirement. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? The proposed variance may alter the character of the neighborhood, by allowing a structure to exceed the height requirements. However, due to the ordinance amendment in 2013, there are existing non-conforming garages built in Edina. All garages, whether they are built in the Country Club District or not, are required to meet the height requirements. The ordinance for garage height measurement was changed to specifically address voiced concerns of residents in the district and throughout Edina that detached garages were being built, (under the old code), with significant ridge heights that were not in character or within the intent of the zoning ordinance. The ordinance was changed to address garage heights that were perceived to be too tall and not in character. There have been no variances approved by the Planning Commission since the ordinance change on how the City measures height. The height requirement allows for a ½ story space above a detached garage with a reasonable height limit that has been the standard without complaint for 8 years. Allowing a structure of this height could set a precedent for future requests for garages or detached structures that exceed the code requirement. Staff Recommendation Deny the 2.33-foot height variance request to allow for a new 20’ 4” tall, detached garage at 4628 Bruce Avenue. Denial is based on the following findings: STAFF REPORT Page 4 1. There is not a practical difficulty that would prevent reasonable use of the property. The garage could be built to meet the 18-foot height requirement. 2. If the variance were denied, reasonable use of the property would not be denied. An 18-foot garage can be constructed on site. 3. The proposed variance will alter the character of the neighborhood. The zoning ordinance was amended in 2013 to address concerns with ridge heights that were not in character or within intent of the zoning code. 4. There have been no variances approved by the Planning Commission since the ordinance change on how the City measures height. The City previously measured height from proposed grade to the mid-point of a pitched roof; and now measures from average existing grade to the ridge or top of a roof. 5. Allowing a structure of this height could set a precedent for future requests for garages or detached structures that exceed the code requirement. DATE: 6/4/2021 TO: Cary Teague – Planning Director FROM: Zuleyka Marquez, PE – Graduate Engineer RE: 4628 Bruce Ave - 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 existing and proposed survey stamped May 27, 2021. Summary of Work The applicant proposes to demo and relocate/rebuild a detached garage. The request is for a variance to the structure height. Easements A 27” VCP stormwater pipe with a cured-in-place liner is located onsite, under the existing garage. The pipe must be protected during demolition and construction. Televising of the existing pipe will be required after construction. An easement for the pipe is required for project closeout; extents and paperwork to be determined at permit phase. Grading and Drainage The existing site drains to the street and private property. The proposed drainage is similar to existing. Stormwater Mitigation The proposed project reduces the amount of impervious surface. A stormwater management plan is not required. Create no new flow paths concentrating drainage area directed to or near private structures. Floodplain Development Local 1% annual chance flood elevation of 889.2’. Suggested lowest opening for new garage is 891.2’ Proposed garage opening is 892.6’. E rosion and Sediment Control A category 1 erosion and sediment control plan is required at permit review to comply with City of Edina Building Policy SP-002. Street and Driveway Entrance No comment. Public Utilities No comment. Miscellaneous A Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit may be required, applicant will need to verify with the district. The structure was built in 1931. The water connection permit is dated 1954. A well is likely located onsite. Thus, coordination with Minnesota Department of Health will be required to locate the well. A well sealing record is required if the scope of project impacts the well. A maintenance permit from MDH may be required. May 26, 2021 To whom it may concern, I am submitting this variance form with the documentation we used for the Edina Heritage Landmark planning committee. On May 21, 2021 we requested the survey's, permits and any documentation regarding the following two properties garages. 4627Casco 4629 Casco We requested these documents under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. As of the date of this letter, we have not received the requested information. I was told by Emily Bodeker today that "she will let me know when the documents are ready". Because time is of the essence, we are submitting our Variance request without these said documents. I am most confident that I should have them soon under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. This variance is being requested because surrounding garages are all in excess of the 18 feet and were built and permitted in 2017 and 2018 respectively. We respectfully request that you consider this variance request for the meeting on June 23, 2021. I am attaching the Edina Heritage Landmark application, our letter/statement dated May 20, 2021, photos of our neighbor to our north and the neighbor directly behind us marked exhibits "A". Exhibit "B" showing the height of the garage at the peek for 4627 Casco, Exhibit "C" represents the garage to our northwest and Exhibit "D" shows the height of the peek at this address. Aslo, I have enclosed all of the builders' drawings and updated surveys. Please don't hesitate to contact me with any questions. rds, Tracie Rossman 4628 Bruce Avenue Edina MN 952-201-0522 CITY OF EDINA MAY 2 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Truss to Plate Connectors 12 COMMON AND/OR HIP SET TRUSSES @ 24” O/C 2” X 4” STRONGBACK LAID HORIZONTAL 2” X 4” - 45° GABLE BRACE TO STRONGBACK (WHERE APPLICABLE) ICE & WATER SHIELD FROM ROOF EDGE TO 24" BEYOND PLATE LINE 15# FELT UNDERLAYMENT, SELF SEALING SHINGLES. EXTEND SHINGLES 3/4” BEYOND FACE OF 1” X 2” DRIP EDGE 1" X 2” LEDGER 2” X 4” LOOKOUTS (USE TRUSS TAIL CUT-OFFS) 1” X 6” FASCIA WITH 1” X 2” DRIP EDGE 1 HOUR RATED FIRE WALLS WITHIN 5' OF LOT LINE, 5/8" TYPE X EXTERIOR GRADE GYPSUM ON EXTERIOR SIDE 5/8" TYPE X ON INSIDE WALL 7/16” OSB WALL SHEATHING SHEATHING EXTENDS TO ROUGH OPENINGS, UNDERSIDE OF RAFTER TAILS AND TO UNDERSIDE OF ROOF SHEATHING AT GABLES. FLASH ALL ROUGH OPENINGS 2” X 4” STUDS @ 16” O/C 2” X 6” TREATED SOLE PLATES & SEAL DOUBLE 2” X 4” TOP PLATES - STAGGER TOP PLATE SEAMS 48” MIN - INTERLOCK AT CORNERS 8’ 0” CEILING HEIGHT (SLAB TO TOP PLATE) FLOATING MONOLITHIC SLAB 4000# / 6 BAG MIX / 4% AIR-ENTRAINED 4” MIN THICK SLAB, / 0” WIDE X / 0” THICK PERIMETER 6X6 10 GA. WELDED WIRE MESH REINFORCED 2 ! 1/2” REBAR PERIMETER, SHARP BEND @ CORNERS 2” MIN COVERAGE ON ALL REINFORCEMENT 4” MIN COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL BASE TOP OF SLAB 6” MIN ABOVE GRADE 1 COURSE 6” CONCRETE BLOCK 1/2” X 12” VERT REBAR @ 48” O/C GROUT SOLID 24” CONCRETE APRON - 1/2” EXPANSION JOINT - SLOPE AWAY @ 1/4”/FT 1/2” X 16” RIGHT ANGLE ANCHOR BOLTS - 7” EMBEDDED, 2” MIN EXPOSED 7” FROM OUTSIDE CORNERS - EACH WAY, 6’ 0” MAX SPACING GROUT CORES SOLID AT ANCHOR BOLT LOCATIONS DOOR(S): OVERHEAD DOOR HEADER(S): SITE ADDRESS: __________________________________________________ STATE LICENSE # BC316811 4301 HIGHWAY 7, #115 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416-5807 BUS: 952.920.8888 Roof Height ______ Truss Mid Point ______ Factory Truss Rafter Type Standard Storage Attic OH Door Size___________________________ OH Door Header_________________________ Siding Type ____________________________ Shingle Type ___________________________ Fire Wall Location ________________________ Wall Height _____ Roof Pitch _____ Truss Mid Point _____ Roof Height _____ EAVE ___________ RAKE ___________ 4628 Bruce Avenue Edina 20'4" 14'8" 12 12" 12" 4 16x7 non-bearing 2-2x12 22' Stucco 8'8"130mph asphalt West n& North 8'8"12 14'8"20'4" 1 of 6 5/4/21, 2:42 PM 22' 4' East Wall North Wall South Wall West Wall Elevation Drawing Stucco Siding To Match HomeShingle Color To Match Home 4' 22' Staircase Layout for Gable Room In Attic Garage Construction 5 of 6 HOUSE PORCH GARAGE. PAVER PATIO DECK/PATIO' CREflIT TOTAL EX_STI.... BUILDINGS AREA OF LOT BUILDING COVERAGE 1,224 SQ. FT. 227 SQ. FT. 403 to. FT. 237' SP. F1-• -150 SD. FT. 1,941 80. Fr. 7,G78 sa. Fr. 24.106 EXISTING BUILDING. COVERAGE HOUSE PORCH GARAGE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVER PATIO FRONT WLk & swop, BLOCK WALLS NEIGHBOR'S .DRIVEWAY: TOTAL EXISTING HARDCOVER AREA OF LOT LOT COVERAGE EXISTING HARDCOVER 1,224 SQ. FT. • 227 SQ. FT. - 403 SQ. Fr. 1;sao SQ. FT. 237 SQ. FT. 204 SQ. F. 78 so. FT. 9e S. 1T. 4,006 SQ. FT. 7,876 SQ. FT. 50.9116 I. EXIET1NO DWELLING 0071140 . liWalitg . 0, :I I ' •'... '''',I4...... • 1'..crott'.eRgl19.2.2nR''41!—'''AY..1.1.. '.--.,---, • -... "" - - ... ..f1.3 ..P' .. ... ' • ' '- . .‘. • .:-.-: t. . .. $:.• ,, ..-1 *---. •&N.;. ' ' '1: aoLit 1. '''.'' N. .8.916:'4.0”„a140,.V: •*, :.iiii;''' • r--,4.1 .. .. - ,A -,,,,.. •:,•• .: ,i,, ro.•,•,* ' • :o*e.. :- ,,.,...,.. A; • 4.fik, -•-vv-. -, 4 ' 4 4 Ail .o' 441 I. EXISTING OAF164t ' ' ' • 6.9A4. • ,t9i,d' CITY OF EDINA MAY 27 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT --r 1 EXISTING GARAGE TIM (a X 092.5 • 16 S. V06” E 1431g.S " ea: assr F., pig 0914 7C9 it' 892.7 k. eke 0:4 30 • - . LEGAI,DESCiatiTION: Lot t5 Block 9, Country Club District Fairway Section, .Heirnepin canny, Minnesota. SCOPE OF WORK.& LIMITATIONS:: 1. Showing the length and. direction of boundary lines of the legal description listed above. The scOpt of our services does not itudride determining what you OWn;.whichis a legal Matter. *Please check The legal description -with your records or consult with competent legal counsel, if necessary, to make, sure that. it.i. correct and that any matters ofrecord, such as easements, that. you wish to be included on the, stirVdy4v.6 been shown: ShowinithelOCation ef.observed.eXisfing itepro.Veinents we deemtibeetsaty for.the Survey. 3. Setting survey Market-4 or Verifying existing survey Markers to establish the corners of the property:: Existing building dirnensicies and setbacks measured to outside of siding or AMOCO.. Showing and ttibtiltiting itapp.tvirdis surfacecoverage of the lot for your review and for:the-review Of such governinontsl. agencies that may have jUriSdictiph. over :these requirements to vertfY they are correctly raj:0*n tanto: proceeding with constrileti011. .6: Showing elevations on the site at selected iodations to give Some, indication of the;teptigmphy of the. site: We have 'elan provided a:.benehintirk fOr yournse in determining elevations for construction on this. site: The elevations shown relate only to the benchmark provided on this surVey. Use that bench-Matt and check at least one ether feature shown on the survey When deteittinintether elevations for use (MAWS site or before beginning cOnStrOCtion. 7 This survey has been completed without the benefit of a entreat title commitment There may be existing easements OP other encumbrances -that would be revealed by a current. title commitment. Therefafei.this survey does not purport to show any easements or encumbrances, other than the ones shown hereon. STANDARD .SYMBOLS-lt CONVENTIONS: '."Denoteitort Survey marker, founds unless otherwise neted, DATE REVISION OCSCRIPTION . WENT/JOB ADDRESS TRACIE ROSSMAN 4628 IjItUCEAVE, PlNA, MN' Advance gurogift DOInfte#40, co• • 1421,0*. Nh:7 Meineeole:-S5315 Phone (002) 474 WeintivoOndonnoein I HEMET. ourort THAT. Iii aut,..ANIVEY ce.K0N:Ar. 11.0•PREINIDE 0Y•lit CHYME'S* MT CARSOT siremow• ARE111ATI W. AJIA DAY MCKIM° •DIFAEYOR• UNDER' IA OF 9E. 31A1E A. • 0'0 .Y?! #43503 LICENSE NO; DATE SURVEYED:. MAY 6, 5021 MEET TITLE EXISTINaStIRVElei SHEarS2E 11 kiT esawma NUMBER 219744 DEAVINIO (HUENTATICIth SCALE 0 •td 20' • M MEM M IN= SHEET ND. Si SHEET 1051 ........ • PATE DRAFTED: MO 14, 2021, MAY8;2021. bATE EXISTING nwiaimp. . • EPt! i . • ,.1 • . 8936'40" W 131.18. • ' .0j0p10 PONC4IPqRUg AY + ' ef'4 '^09Fe. ;E;767 ffivcE/siq ROLL ...‘x 11 ui 1:D '71.N P•tp Z t S71•9 BBL% INSTALL Skt-1 FENCE/810 ROI '5 8.SIA X 1392.7 k 9kg 0721 CO 1V.W W.W. .;,.. it 892$ 4 '. __,_.,... e -÷i 03 6kik — .09' Az . I ,, .,.;; ,. is.' • :r.' 6.k, • S 1.39'!3 10.6 E 1312S4-: .." i r ... .... -.. - - 03?§3. 1 1119i6 ,sriNq WAtKr EXISTING GARAGE pq1lNq 8925H PwriNq DWELLING 36 EXISTING 6192/%0 149P2 LEOALDESORIPTION:, Lot 75; Block .9, Country Clot? District Fairway Section, Bennepin dPut0.4 10!11.0916. , SCOPE OF WORK. kt LIMITATIONS 1, Showing the.- length:and •direction of boundary lines of the legal .desaiptderi hated abOVel: The. scope of hitt Saviets does not. indlitde determining What -you evitni whiehis a legal Matter, Please ioheelt the legal description With your records or consult with competent legal Counsel, if necessary, to make Sore that it...it:correct and that any matters of •feceid,Sithh.as easements, that yen wigtk to 'be included on the Survey.hAVibeen. Shemin: 2. Showing the Meath* of ribaved odsiing improvements: we dean necessary fat the survey, :1. -8ottiag luirvey markers or verifying -endSting. Survey tinirkerS"te establish the cornets of the property, 4. All building:thMenSions and setbacks measured to outside of siding -Or stupor,: 5. Showing and tabulating impervious Surface coverage Of the lot for your review and for the review of such government:Stager:dies that may have jurisdiction oVer these. requirements to verify they are correctly SheWribefoth preheating with hoftelinCtitifi. Showing elevations on dm site selected locations tor:give-some inditation..ei the topography cit.the site. We have alam.previded. a far your use M detemniningolovatiOns for construction ttn this aite.. The elevations shown relate only to the bencbniatk pmVideritirt this SurVey.Ille.thatheiteliniarkahrt check at least one other' feature shown on the survey when deterniinhig other elevatiOnsfor Use onthis bite:a-before begirmiiag constructiOn• 7. This ,survey has been completed without the benefit Of a title cOnimitrnent, There may be existing easements or other enetnitheandes that Would. be .revealed by a current title commitment Therefore, .this. survey ;does riot purport to show any easements:or encumbrances other than thetmeashown.hereori.. S. While.Ve show a proposed location for, this hot or Addition, We are not as familiar with your proposed plans as you your architect,, or the builder. are, Review Our -propesed lacatibri of the improxiements and ikoposeci. yard grades ..carettilly to, verify tbaf they match yourylansliefore construction begins.. Alati,We•.tire not as.frimilia With local codes and minimum requirements as the isosl.. heilding..andr.tohing officials in this community are Be sure to shavrthis survey te 'said offieltds; or any 'Other .ofEeitils that may have-jurisdiction over the•proposed improvements and obtain their. approvals before beginning construction or planning improvements tothoprOpeity... STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS: esti Denotes iron survey marker, 'found, unless otherwise noted; . . ... . . . . EsiaNti BUILDING: coveltaaa n axiatraa sikaudevEC , PROPOSED. BUILDINWCOVERAGE PROPOSED. HARDCOVER _ - . HOUSE pence' 1,324 .SQ. FT. ail to. Ft. HOUSE, Patna 1,E24 en. FT. OST:att. FT, HOUSE PORCH 1,224 art.: ar. 2t7 ett• Fr. HOUSE • PORCH 14114 SQ. Fr. 227 80; Ft. GARAGE E. 4011 SQ : FT; OWDE 403 SO; FT. GARAGE 528..50.. FT, GARAGE - • • - • • • "528 SO. FT. PAVER PATIO DECK/PATIO CREDIT 237 .2.0. PT. -.160 SO.- FT, CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVER. PATIO 1,639 •.ati. Ty. 237' ',mi. FT, PAVER PATIO DECK/PATIO CREDIT 531 80 FT. iso SQ .F.t.. 6:410kTE DRIVEWAY PAVER 237 PATIO . 1,171 SC. l'- .. . sa. FT.; TOTAL EXISTING BUILDINGS 1,941 84. FT, FRONT WALK. a. STOOP BLOCK WALLS BOOTH NEIGHBOR'S DRIVEWAY 204 :SQ. FT: 78 SO. FT. ea al.. Ft, TOTAL PROPOSED BUILDINGS 2,08s So; FT. . FRONT SAL( .k STOOP BLOCK WALLS BOUTi1 MIGHBOR'8, DRIVEWAY 204 SQ. FT: ra so. FT. Be sa. Ft AstA OF LOT 7,•878 50. PT. TOTAL EXISTING HARDCOVER 4i ODA SQ. F.t. AREA t OF :LO . . . 7,1178 SG; FT. PROPOSED HARDCOVER . 3,705 30. FT. SLiILDIHG 'COVERAGE 24.0% BUILDING COVERAGE • 26.2% AREA', OF LOT :74 S76 SO. Fr. AREA Dr LOT 7sG76. SCR FT. LOT'COVERAGE 50.01 LOT COVERAGE • 478% DATE .REYEION:DESCRIPTION. CLIENT/JOB ADDRESS TRAM ROSEMAN 4628 BRUCE AVE EDINA., MN Advance Sinvoyhp..4 En2hmeni7g*OcA, ihwyN7, MtnnijoilT, Nutbnoidz :Oaks • .Pliohoists2y474.75.64 sowsr.cravr THAT TRE PLAN, SURVEY UR REPORT sos rREpARED sv w pluutagt 'Jr °attar surmeam MD THAT] AD DULY RBTSIIREDkfli4l &8iTR (Met CF 'RESTATE TA. • DATESURVEVEDf MAY16,i 3031 DATE DRAFTED: i,kri TB. $24 SHEETTITLE PROPOSED SURVEY ràiz 11<11 ORAwma Numnati 4-OPP 74 ['RAMO ORENTATION8S:ALE SHEET.N01. S 1 :at:teat-it:W.1 #43563 MAY i9, 2021 LicENsE NO. DATE. . CITY OF EDINA MAY .27 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT • 04=g' 4t41-," j1; Lt- 1 II c. ' 4 ," 4 L 3 U- 2 Lu Cs' C") CC cJ <r. z 0 CL 111 ' Cs.) •cc ' / — 0 d- AI , 1- Z w CC 1.0 z ',/ z / k a w S . ;" • . , 14'4 • t,4 • r•••••,, f•I'r ; iperif;t7 h ,gi . .7•1X7r ' • ,f 7 Pc.' • fi y 4t: 4. A' r./P• ; 1"tèhJ . ;;. • ' tsj LI _J- LJ 2 r CITY OF FDINA MAY 2 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Laser Distance .,,Meter CITY OF EDINA MAY 2 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.3c , 6P- f Dr V-a•-> 7 01 1 „stf CITY OF EDINA MAY 2 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT .416. READ OFF CLEAR CITY OF EDINA MAY 2 7 2021 PLANNING DEPARTMENT r Nr e r (_ p O f^ t)-C,-1--1 an pug, ta.. it09neg , gen. SOL.SMART CASE STUDY: EDINA, MINNESOTA- FOSTERING RENEWABLE ENERGY THROUGH INNOVATION AND COLLABORATION Proving that you don't have to be in a sunny climate to use sun power, the city of Edina, Minnesota, is a leader in solar energy use as part of its overall efforts to promote renewable energy. The city recently earned the prestigious SolSmart Gold designation, becoming the third city in the Twin Cities Metro Area to signal it is "open for solar business." What does this designation mean for Edina? As a So\Smart designee. the city_has completed3 thorough review of its processes, codes, regulations, and much more so that residents and businesses have a streamlined process for going solar. Efforts included ensuring solar permits are turned around in three business days or less, providing an online inspection scheduling platform, and building a community solar garden on its public works building. These actions drive solar business, local development, and jobs to the community. Edina's highly dedicated staff and supportive residents are focused on making their city a leader in renewable energy. As Casey Casella, a city management fellow who worked diligently on this SolSmart effort, said in an interview with the Sun Current, "City staff have worked for over a year with a critical eye toward our processes and ordinances. We are roud to encourage solar it community and look forward to future innovation in renewable technologies. Community Solar Garden Edina's goal is to have renewable energy be vital to the fabric of the community. The city is the proud host of the Edina Community Solar Garden, located on roof of the Edina Public Works Building. Another first is that this community solar garden serves residential subscribers of" income levels, with a total of 68 households taking advantage of this energy source. All of thi possible because of a commitment by and collaboration between the city of Edina, Minnesot_"o-tears In t e r fa it h P o w e r & L ig h t (w h ic h p a r t n e r s w it h fa it h c o m m u n it ie s t o a d d r e s s t h e e ff e c t s o f c lim a t e ch an g e ), and Cooperative Energy Futures (an energy co-op). The idea of a community solar garden began with the city's Energy and Environment Commission looking at options to make the city a leader in using renewable energy. The commission knew it wouldn't be easy to get off the ground because finding proper acreage for the solar garden in the dense city would be a challenge. City project workers Megan O'Hara and Tara Brown were introduced to the community solar garden project and they worked closely with Minnesota Interfaith Power & Light. G a in in g R es id e n t B u y In O'Hara and Brown had to ensure that residents knew about the solar garden project and supported it, and that all 68 households subscribed within a six-month period in order to procure the needed project funding. The community solar garden contract with each household requires a commitment of 25 years and, if someone moves before 25 years, the homeowner would have to pay a fine and the next person on the waiting list would become a new community solar garden member. This made the contract fair and equitable for every household, regardless of income. "At the end of the day, the solar garden would not have been created had we not had residents sign up to be subscribers, Brown told a reporter for the local high school newspaper. Cooperative Energy Futures is the developer of the community solar garden and the only developer in the state to develop solar gardens for low-to-moderate-income households. It is also an investor in solar gardens throughout the greater Minneapolis area. The goal was to have participants of the solar garden pay less for their electricity and have the added benefit of supporting an environmentally friendly way to source their energy. Privacy - Terms Financi ng the Project Financing for the project was made possible because Edina residents subscribed early in support of the effort, affirming to the banks that this was a worthy investment. Cooperative Energy Futures has leased the roof space from Edina for 25 years for this 618kW solar garden and installed 1,926 solar panels. O'Hara said in the student newspaper interview, "Part of the beauty of this model is that it serves people no matter their income level. As long as you have an electric bill, no matter how small, you can offset the electricity costs by paying a similar amount to Cooperative Energy Futures. Another commitment made by the city is to serve as the backup subscriber to the community solar garden. This means the city will purchase portions of the electricity produced by the community solar garden should subscribers unexpectedly leave the program, ensuring that electricity from this source continues to be cheaper, the community solar garden thrives without interruption, and the financial risks to Cooperative Energy Futures are mitigated. Edina's community solar garden opened in late 2018 and is now fully utilized, with a waiting list. The city also is proud to share its road to success with other communities and will be monitoring its progress as it continues to focus on renewable energy efforts. Click here to learn more about Edina's efforts in the Sol$mart program This case study was written by SolSmart team member Usha Ramamurthy, Director of the National Civic eague's Sustainability Program. r ------- JOIN OUR MAILING LIST ) ---- -- -- --- J. SOLSMART IS FUNDED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY SOLAR ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES OFFICE. Privacy - Terms Preliminary estimate for 4628 Bruce Avenue, Minneapolis Annual production System size 6.0 kW 25 year savings 6,440 kWh $51,417 Local system prices (after federal tax credit) $9,264 - $13,896 (based on current offers from 6 local solar companies) Expand details I _ Powered with technology from Google e Project Sunroof :.3NREL PV Watts Calculator # 6ENABILITY »%« TensorFlow 1/1 ENE R G Y NE I S N E T W OR K M ID W ES T N E W S Minnesota couple's idea aims to keep solar panels free of snow buildup by Frank Jossi March 10, 2020 A M innesota couple is developing a potential solution for snow-covered solar panels: incorporating a heating m aterial that would detect and respond to m elt accum ulated flakes. Credit: soundslogical / Flickr / Creative Com m ons The proposal recently received a $50,000 prize from a National Renewable Energy Laboratory solar manufacturing contest. Correction: The Duluth, M innesota, co m pany working on heated solar panel technology is called Vagner Energy . An earlier version of this story misstated the nam e of the com pany. This story has also been updated to incl ude a co m ment fro m Electro Plastics, which m anufactures the radiant heating pro duct used in Vagner Energy 's solar concept. A Minnesota couple's idea for keeping solar panels clear of snow is gaining traction after winning a $50,000 federal innovation prize. Solar panels work well in cold weather, but not as well if they are covered even partially by snow. The tilt of panels helps snow slide off, but that doesn't always clean them. Rakes and other products require solar panel owners to climb on roofs or devote significant staff time to snow removal. Karl Wagner and Danielle Rhodes noticed snow buildup on the solar panels of their Duluth home last year that cost three days of production. Commercial installations around town appeared to be encrusted with snow for days. Wagner, a data scientist and inventor, developed a potential solution that incorporates into solar panels a heating material with nanotechnology components. The couple's "Solar For Snow" proposal was recently chosen as a semi-finalist for the American-Made Solar Prize, receiving $50,000 in prize money. Administered by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the contest operates out of the U.S. Department of Energy Solar Energy Technologies Office. "It was definitely a surprise because there were a lot of great ideas in the competition," Wagner said. "When I got the email that we were semi-finalist I thought, 'Did I read that right?"' Much of the Upper Midwest sees lost solar generation due to snow accumulation on panels, as does another potential market: remote areas of A la s k a . W a g n e r a n d R h o d e s b e lie v e a p p ly in g h e a t c o u ld r e m o v e s n o w fr o m s o la r a r ra y s o v e r t h e c o u r s e o f a fe w h o u r s . T h e S o la r fo r S n o w t e a m r e c e iv e d e q u ip m e n t a n d m e n t o r in g s u p p o r t fr o m H e li e n e , a C a n a d ia n -b a s e d s o la r m a n u fa c t u r e r w it h a fa c t o r y in M in n e s o t a . T h e c o m p a n y is in t e r e s t e d in s e e in g t h e r e s u lt s o f t h e r e s e a r c h , W a g n e r s a id . M in n e s o t a P o w e r , t h e u t ilit y s e r v in g t h e n o r t h e r n p a r t o f th e s t a t e , a ls o a s s is t e d th e p r o je c t . "It is a good idea," said Martin Pochtaruk, Heliene's president. "Now we need to see it being piloted." Pochtaruk said such an "add-on" could be incorporated into solar module assembly but only after extensive trials to study power induced degradation of panels and other potential adverse effects, he said. Wagner concedes the panels will likely cost more and create installation challenges because they need a connection to receive low voltage electricity to activate the nano-material. He wants to continue to try to drop the production cost and to simplify the electrical work required of installers. Still in the early stages of panel design, Wagner said the nanotechnology would have to last as long as the 25-year warranty most solar panels carry. The modules would have no frames, allowing snow to slide off easily, and have a more durable structure to support high-efficiency equipment, he said. The size of the market for self-warming panels remains a question since in regions with moderate winters snow generally blows or slips off panels after a few hours. But snow on arrays is enough of a problem that the federal government is studying it, Wagner said. Local Duluth clean energy advocates say the solution could help assuage consumer fears about solar. "In the north there's often a huge perception problem about whether or not solar is viable, and the number one thing we have to respond to is, 'When the pan els have sn ow on th em h ow can th e p an els b e p ro du ci n g electrici ty ?'" sa id Jod i Slic k , C EO of Eco libriu m 3, a su stain abili ty ad voca cy gro u p in D u lu th . Too m any peo p le ru le ou t solar in n o rth ern M in n eso ta b e ca u se o f co n cern s about sn ow an d th e region 's sev ere cl im ate, sh e sa id . H ea ted pa n els co u ld help in crease so lar ad option by h o m eow n ers an d b u sin esses, sh e ad d ed . The in spira tion fo r h eated pan els cam e to W agn er at an en ergy desig n ex p o in D uluth last year, w h ere h e m et w ith rep resen tatives of a St. L o u is-b a se d com p an y that m an u fa ctu res low -voltage ra dia n t h ea t fo r fl o o rin g , ro o fs, gutt ers, and drivew ay s. "It's a n an otech n olo gy th at relies on a very lo w am o u n t of en ergy to p ro d u ce a lot of h eat," R h od es said . "T h at's revolu tion ary." The com pan y th at m akes th e ra d ian t h eatin g p ro d u ct, kn ow n as Ste p H e a t, said it h as field ed sim il ar call s fr o m oth er com p an ie s in terested in th e poten tial to w arm so lar pan els. "T h ese last years w e h ave h ad m u ltip le requ ests fo r m eltin g sn o w o n so la r pan els an d w e h ave b een w o rk in g w ith differen t co m pa n ie s to fi n d th e be st solu tion to solve th is pro b lem by usin g ou r h eatin g tech n o lo gy ," sa id M o n ica Irgen s, presid en t of E lectro P lastics, w h ich m an u fa ctu res Step H eat. R hod es said th e tech n olo gy co u ld detect an d h eat on ly area s of pa n els co a ted by sn ow . "T h is m aterial reco g n izes w h ere th ere are lo w er tem p era tu re s o n th e su rfa ce an d app lies h eat to th ose area s," sh e said . "T h at's th e n atu re o f th e m aterial. It kn ow s w h at to do ." In itially, the cou ple tested p an els w ith an in ch of sn ow an d fo u n d h ea tin g created sm all sn ow av alan ch es th at cl ean ed p an els, R h o d es sa id . T h ey w ill experim en t w ith h igh er sn ow lev els in th e fu tu re. R hod es w orks as a real estate agen t in D u lu th an d h an d le s b u sin ess an d m arketin g fo r Vagn er En ergy , th e com pan y sh e an d W ag n er crea ted . W ag n er h a s h a d a life l o n g in t e r e s t in s o la r e n e r gy a n d d e v e lo p e d th e w e b s it e Museum of Solar Energy to share his knowledge. Items seen in photographs on the online museum's site are on view now in real life at the Minnesota State Capitol and state Veteran's Affairs office. The jack-of-all-trades nature of the couple's creativity received another award recently, this one from NASA for their concept for growing lettuce in space. "We're a semi-finalist in that contest, too," Rhodes said. "It's been fun." ~ FRANK JOSSI Frank is an independent journalist and consultant based in St. Paul and a longtime contributor to Midwest Energy News. His articles have appeared in more than 50 publications, including Minnesota Monthly, W ired, the Los Angeles Times, the M inneapolis Star Tribune, Minnesota Technology, Finance & Commerce and others. Frank has also been a Humphrey policy fellow at the University of Minnesota, a Fulbright journalism teacher in Pakistan and Albania, and a pro gram director of the World Press Institute at Macalester College. More by Frank Jossi @ 2021 Ene rgy News Network. Proudly powered by Newspack by Automattic Office of ENERGY EFFICIENCY & RENEWABLE ENERGY Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Let it Snow: How Solar Panels Can Thrive in Winter Weather JANUARY 5, 2017 f - ·-r - -, :. l mn 'Y ] Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy» Let it Snow: How Solar Panels Can Thrive in Winter Weather liJ At the Regional Test Center in Williston, Vermont, researchers are examining how framed (in the background) and frameless (in the foreground) solar photovoltaic modules handle snowy conditions. I Photo Courtesy: Sandia National Laboratories If you live outside of the sunny Southwest, the weather can bring sudden changes this time of year. Many parts of the country have already seen snow, and the polar vortex has extended far enough south that even our nation's capital has experienced a few deep chills. Although at first blush it may seem that solar power is ideal for the summer, solar photovoltaic (PV) panels actually produce useful power throughout all four seasons. Tackling weather-related challenges is one reason why the SunShot Initiative funds Regional Test Centers, where solar panel performance can be time- tested in widely varying climates. Researchers at the test centers have shown that solar can still successfully generate electricity in snowy areas and other harsh environ men ts. A dusting of snow has little impact on solar panels because the wind can easily blow it off. Light is able to forward scatter through a sparse coating, reaching the panel to produce electricity. It's a different story when heavy snow accumulates, which prevents PV panels from generating power. Once the snow starts to slide, though, even if it only slightly exposes the panel, power generation is able to occur again. Heavy snowfall can present a problem when the weight of the snow places stress on a PV system's support structure. The majority of PV panels in the field today have frames, which tend to create localized stresses at the mounting points. At the Vermont Test Center, researchers are characterizing impacts such as microcracks formed by the non-uniform load of the snow. As can be seen in the photo, the absence of a frame allows the snow to slide off. This research has the potential to make solar a more economic option for energy generation in northern climates. With or without frames, though, it's important to note that snow can actually help clean a PV module as it melts away. It's similar to what happens to a car's windshield: if the snow is allowed to melt off, the windshield is left without a speck of debris. That's because any di rt on the glass wi II bond with the snow, washing it away when the sun melts it off. The anti-soiling properties of snow inherently make solar panels cleaner and able to reach higher efficiencies. Sun Shot is exploring other ways to help PV panels withstand the elements of winter through our support of the DuraMat Consortium, led by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. DuraMat researchers are investigating how a variety of materials used in the packaging and mounting of PV components perform in different climates. These studies will allow lower cost, more reliable, and more predictable new products to find their way to mass production. Dura Mat is also investigating approaches that optimize frameless modules and make them more readily adaptable to outdoor extremes. Dura Mat's newly developed materials will be tested at the Regional Test Centers to evaluate their functionality over a wide range of real- world conditions. This winter, even if the snow piles high, we can remain confident that our solar panels will generate power and that research conducted at the Regional Test Centers will help PV perform even better in the future . . Q. CHARLIE GAY eds' Dr.charlie Gay is the former solar Energy Technologies office Director for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.Dr. Charlie Gay is the former Solar Energy Technologies Office Director for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. MORE BY THIS AUTHOR Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Forrestal Building 1000 Independence Avenue, SW washington, DC 20585 f E» [ An office of ABOUT OFFICE OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY & RENEWABLE ENERGY V ENERGY.GOV RESOURCES V FEDERAL GOVERNMENT V web Policies • Privacy • No Fear Act • Whistleblower Protection • Information Quality • Open Gov • Accessibility • Vulnerability Disclosure Program D ete rm ining y our hom e's sola r ro o ft op c om patibility 2 el#a Roger Kuznia Solar Expert May 03, 2019 Last Updated: March 23rd, 2021 at 4:16 pm Read Time: 8 Minutes Adding solar energy at your home to save money and help save the planet has a lot of appeal. As you begin to research solar panels, you've probably wondered if your roof is even suitable for solar panels. To get the most out of your solar panels, they should be installed where they will get the most sun. For most homes, this place is the roof. The ideal roof would be south-facing, get plenty of sunlight, and have a tilt of about 30-45 degrees. However, even if your roof doesn't have these characteristics, you still can get solar panels installed. And if you can't install panels on your roof, you can look into a ground-mounted solar panel system. Figure o u t h ow m uch sun y o ur ro o f g ets Trees or buildings near your home may block the sun, which will affect how much energy your solar system produces. Here's a simple way to find out how much sun your roof gets. First, go outside a few times during the day and visually assess when your roof, and what parts of it, get full sun. Next, determine how many days of sun you get on a regular basis. You can easily check how much peak sunlight is available in your area by checking the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) map. Ideally, your roof will get full sun between the hours of 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. all year long. T h e m o re p e a k s u n lig h t y o u r h o m e g e ts , th e m o re s o la r e n e rg y it c a n g e n e ra te . G e tt in g a t le a s t 4 h o u rs o f p e a k s u n lig h t is c o n s id e re d be s t fo r s o la r ro o ft o p p a n e ls . H o w e ve r, e v e n A la s k a , a s ta te th a t g e ts le s s th a n fo u r h o u rs o f p e a k s u n , s till c a n be n e fit fr o m s o la r p o w e r. POWERHOME EXPERTS CAN HELP ASSESS YOUR ROOF If you're looking to install rooftop solar panels and aren't sure if your home receives the amount of sunlight necessary, or if your roof is suitable, contact POWERHOME today. As part of our simple, three-step installation process, we will send a solar expert to your home for a free evaluation. Once at your home, one of our solar experts will address any questions or concerns that you may have about your roof and advise you on the best way to proceed with installing rooftop solar panels. If your roof isn't in the ideal position, there is no need to worry. Rooftop solar panels may still be able to be installed. Part of the solar mounting process is fixing metal racking to the roof of your home, and our solar experts may be able to angle these racks in such a way that they will garner the amount of sunlight needed. If there are still concerns about whether rooftop solar panels will provide the maximum benefit to your home, there are other options to look into. Here at POWERHOME, we believe that every family should have access to clean, renewable solar power, and our team will do everything we can to help achieve your goal. Where is the best place to install my solar rooftop panels? The best place for rooftop solar panels is on a south-facing roof without obstructions such as vents, antennas, skylights, or a chimney. West- and east-facing roofs also get enough sun for solar panels. If you don't have very much unobstructed room for panels, or the only available space is north-facing, or most of the space gets a lot of shade from surrounding trees or buildings, your roof may not be the best spot. You always can consider ground-mounted solar panels. During your free home evaluation, our solar experts will review all of this with you. We work closely with families when determining a solar panel installation plan. Our evaluation encompasses not only the amount of sun your roof receives, but also your fa m ily 's u n iq u e p o w e r n e e d s a n d p o w e r g o a ls . A ll o f th e s e fa c to rs a re ta k e n in to c o n s id e ra tio n w h e n d e te rm in in g th e b e s t p la c e to in s ta ll ro o ft o p s o la r p a n e ls . What roof styles and slopes are good for solar rooftop panels? Solar panels require a certain amount of space to be installed properly. A large, rectangular roof with no chimney or vents is, of course, ideal for solar rooftop installation. But that is not the norm. Solar panel installers are familiar with many different types of roof styles and can work around features such as skylights, chimneys and dormers, if needed. You'll also have to consider the slope of your roof. If your roof is flat, you may find that a lack of precipitation runoff could affect overall solar production. If the slope is too steep, you may be limiting the amount of sunlight your panels can take in. In general, a 30- degree tilt works well. Your solar installer will let you know the optimal arrangement for your panels. Which roof materials work with solar rooftop installations? While some materials work better than others when installing solar rooftop panels, most roofs work well with solar. The most common roofing material, asphalt shingles, are perfect for solar panel installations. Metal roofs also work well with solar. If your roof is made of something other than the materials named above, don't worry, we will evaluate your roof to determine whether we can move forward with your project. Our solar experts are able to carefully examine the material your roof is made of, as well as evaluate the structural integrity of the roof and advise you on the best plan. How does roof condition affect the installation? Our rooftop solar panels come with a 25-year product workmanship warranty and a 30- year linear power performance warranty. Your warranty may even be eligible for extension based on registration. These warranties protect rooftop solar panel owners against manufa cturing defects and prem ature wear and tear. M ost solar panels will continue working long after the warranty has expired. Since ro oftop solar panels have such a long lifespan, you don't want to be in a position where you need to replace your ro of shortly after your new panels have been installed. Evaluate your roof, and if it's in need of an upgrade, have that taken care of befo re the installation of your panels. POWERHOME HAS A GAF-CERTIFIED ROOFING TEAM TO ADDRESS YOUR NEEDS The great thing about choosing to install your rooftop solar panels with POWERHOME is that we are more than just a solar installation company. We are also a GAF-certified roofer. This means that after we evaluate your roof to ensure proper placement and sunlight for the best solar panel function, we will also evaluate the integrity of your roof. If there are any potential problems, we will alert you before installation. As a GAF-certified roofer, if you need repairs before installing rooftop solar panels, we can take care of those. You won't have to deal with separate companies, conflicting timelines, multiple contracts, or delays in getting started. POWERHOME has you covered. REPLACING YOUR ROOF POST-SOLAR PANEL INSTALLATION You can have your roof replaced after solar panel installation, but you'll need to have your panels removed and reinstalled to do so. If you have 10-15 years left in your roof, go ahead and have your panels installed. If you have serious issues with your roof, or less than 10 years before it is due for replacement, consider tackling roof issues before you install your panels. Should you find yourself in need of an unexpected repair shortly after installing your solar panels, don't panic. Simply contact POWERHOME and we will come back to your home for a visit to assess the situation. As our experts are familiar with the solar panel installation, we know how to detach your rooftop solar panels, fix your roof, and then reset the panels safely. Homeowners association (HOA) rules and regulations If y o u liv e in a s u b d iv is io n g o v e rn e d by a n H O A , yo u m a y no t g e t th e la st w o rd a b o u t y o u r s o la r p a n e l in s ta lla tio n . M a n y H O A s ha v e re g u la tio n s g o v e rn in g th e o u te r stru ct u re o f h o m e s , ro o f in c lu d e d . P O W E R H O M E w o rks to s e c u re th e ne e d e d a p p ro va ls fr o m H O A s d ur ing a ll o f its be h in d -th e -s c e n e s w o rk le a d in g u p to in sta lla tio n . If y o u 're c o n s id e rin g a ro o ft o p s o la r in s ta lla tio n , yo u c a n re a c h o u t to yo u r H O A b e fo re h a n d to s e e if it ha s a n e x is tin g p o lic y o n s o la r p a n e ls . T h e H O A w ill b e a b le to p ro v id e y o u w ith its g u id e lin e s a n d po in t to th e s p e c ifi c a tio n s th a t m u st be ad h e re d to , if a n y . L a w s re g a rd in g H O A s a n d ro o fto p s o la r p a n e ls va ry g re a tly b a se d o n sta te . S o m e s ta te s h a v e w h a t is k n o w n a s a "s o la r a c c e s s la w ." If yo u liv e in a sta te w ith a so la r a c c e s s la w , y o u r H O A m a y no t ha v e th e rig h t to d e n y y o u th e rig h t to in sta lla tio n . T h e C o m m u n ity A s s o c ia tio n s In s titu te is c o n tin u o u s ly w o rk in g w ith sta te s a n d la w m a k e rs to m a k e s o la r po w e r m o re a c c e s s ib le to a ll ho m e o w n e rs , re g a rd le ss of w h e th e r y o u a re a p a rt o f a n H O A o r no t. W hat if your roof isn't suited for solar panels? Even if your roof isn't suited for solar panels, you may still be able to add solar power. There may be other buildings on your property, such as a garage or shed, that are suitable for solar panels. Or, you may have room for a ground-mounted solar panel system. Ground-mounted solar panels may be the right option if your home cannot accommodate rooftop solar panels. Ground-mounted solar installations have the same functionality and the same benefits of rooftop solar panels, and may be ideal if you have a large amount of property. You can learn more about the differences between rooftop solar panel installations and ground-mounted installations here. Contact PO W ERH OME for a free hom e evaluation today If y o u a re in te re s te d in in s ta llin g ro o ft o p s o la r p a n e ls , o r a n y o th e r so la r p a n e l in s ta ll a tio n , co ntact u s at 800 -76 5-27 15 . W e'Il be happy to come to your home for a roof inspection and consultation About Roger Kuznia Roger Kuznia is POWE RHOME SOLAR's digital journalist and brand manager. Chances are, if you have read an article on POWERHOME SOLAR's website, he's either written it or edited it. He sees opinions of solar changing daily and is proud to evangelize the benefits of solar to POWERHOME's prospective customers. He's also proud to help build POWERHOME's movement in bringing cleaner, greener energy to all who want to reduce their carbon footprint. Posted in Solar Education About POWERHOME SOLAR POWERHOME SOLAR is a residential and commercial solar energy company that consistently innovates in designing, operating, financing, and installing solar panel systems. Categories • Customer Testimonials • News • Solar Education BE IN THE Offers, tips and everything you need to know to make the most informed decision 4%% sss « s ·ibl te&±##%%; _,, '·"• · '• · ··.. poss1 e -.·.,. · · · .. _ :,·. ·,,·.u1 p 1 a " $88 Ag274283 ~ma.ii . . . . .. . . . .. , ,v ,,{: , (;!fu .• , ' , ::{I{{; ' , , ' ·•.·._·.•.·.· ·.:•·.·•···· .. •·.,·•· ···· ...•. ·.·.•.·.•.·:.:•.:,,•·•··:·.•.• .. •·,·.•·.• .. ;·•···.·.•·.•··•·•·.;•·'•_.,;.·_,· .. • .. ··.• .. ·.:.•.·.•·····•· .. •·· .. ·.:,•.·.•···.:.:.•,· :·.•:_,·· :._•·'.;:.[•·,•~··:···.• ..• ·.,·.•.:•·•.·.•.·• -.:_.~.:._ ;.: .. ••.··•··•·•·.•~,· · · •. :,,~, .. •·.·•.;.··.·.•.•·•·:.· .. :.·:··:1.• •·•[:·:;·.:.•.·.•._ 1 ,·.: .. ,,··,.~.: ·.:.:.: .•• ·•:··.::·•··· •. '._i•·-•:·~•··.:,_.·,,•.•.·.,;,·.,,:: ~.·.~._•l\;.~.·.:•.··~ ~,·.--".~.-;·,'t.;· .• !·,_•._.·.· GET THE NEWSLETTER RM9Ms#4#$ ES.. REDI BUSINE: ''%! ~,,,11""""""\111''"""''""""''"'~'"'~, ', . ' ' ii'""' 1. POWERHOME's 12 Months on Us Offer. New customers only. Purchase agmt reg'd. Min. $2,040. Actual rebate varies depending on system & initial 12 mnths. of loan payments (or, f purchases, equivalent value as if financing used). You are still responsible for paying your lender. Reb; e - ' other otters. vi gr" BBB 2. Avail. wl #$%$%$2%3$%.5$$2%%%$$#$$.sews sh#$id@i #s#$it#i###%ii$%$%%%he 3. The amount of power available from the battery durin connected, customer usage and battery config. No assurances can be given that the solar system or always work. You should never rely upon either to power life support or other medical devices._$j .2j$%@,%$%3±2$2f£$$±92$$79%,±g.$#%%s%$ifs$@@$i%$if$if£j$%$, ihf?$jff%ij%ht%%2$%%#4%$$ h%$$$$@ ii$#$f2%#$.$#f%$$%$$ 4. Actual results will vary on various factors. Results are not guar #ti$%$f$ 8ff5#f.j%$$.$£$,$%±i,%@%%zi 5. To qualify, you must have federal income tax liability at least equal to the value of the tax credit. Tax , subject to change / termination. We make no guarantees regarding eligibility for any tax credits. We do not provide tax advice. Contact your personal tax advisor for eligibility requirements 9j± j j±st% a lg± pg #ef@43jj <¢. g ig@p ig @ ,,8 gg, ±@ii : 4G,, u,8 e r je j g gs p g ,kt in@ii ; ©2021 POWERHOME SOLARALL RIGHTS RESERVED I DIGITAL STRATEGY BY Elevation D rawing Stucco Siding To Match Home Shingle Color To Match Home 4' 16 East Wall 2 24 North Wall pl#. 4. I"et'ilk; {/4l#"f3' E if1: # p zy lj {4 !lil ? }}} t H4 + Hi/f /! 'I ., I I 'I I '; ' ± ~l { 1 tli 'y } ['lit/4!liill/# l#ii/4lilllll ' • 1 ' men ,I South Wall c s • Jde/ U e° 6 pke 3 22 West Wall S ola- Ye( maiPe oov 0 Staircase Layout for $@pr Room In Attic Garage Construction in .ucdi ng cower end walls. Frame wsal! inside of truss opening as needer; for 5 of 6 C O U N T R Y C L U B DI S T R IC T D E T A C H E D G A RA G E S T A T IS T IC S S q u a r e H e ig h t a t H e ig h t a t H e ig h t a t A d d r e s s A r c h it e c t u r e F o o t a g e P e a k l ig p oi n t E a v e R id g e P itc h o f R o o f D a te 4625 Drexel Ave. Eng. Cottage ---- 473 sq. ft. 21.2' 14.5' 8.0' 23.0' 15.0/12 5/13/2003 -- 4910 Arden Ave. Eng. Cottage 484 sq, ft, 19.5' 14.5' 8.5' ? ? 7/2/2003 4506 Bruce Ave. New Eng. Col. 528 sq. ft. 19.0' 14.5' ? ? ? 9/9/2003 4624 Arden Ave. Eng. Cottage 576 sq. ft. 18.0' 13.0' 8.7' 27.0' 8.0/12 5/11/2004 4517 Arden Ave. Eng.Cottage ~- 539 sq. ft. - 23.0' 15.5' 6.5' ? 12.0/12 6/8/2004 -- - 4526 Drexel Ave. Eng. Cottage 529 sq. ft. 18.0' 14.0 hip 7.5' N/A 10.0/12 7/13/2004 461 9 Drexel Ave. Eng. Cottage 491 sq. ft. 20.0' 15.0' hip 10.0' N/A 12.0/12 9/13/2004 4903 Bruce Ave. Eng. Cottage --- 660 sq. ft. 23.0' 16.0' 9.0' 33.5' 14.0/12 10/12/2004 o ~ - 4604 Bruce Ave. Med./ltal. Ren 484 sq, ft, 17.0' 13.5' 10.0' N/A 4.0/12 4/12/2005 4607 Moorland Ave. Norm./Eng.Tud. ~ 611 sq. ft. - 20.6' 15' hip 9.5' N/A 10.0/12 5/8/2005 - - 4603 Moorland Ave. Eng. Cottage 644 sq. ft. 18.1' 14' hip 10.1.' N/A 8.0/12 5/8/2005 4615 Casco Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 484 sq. ft. 16.5' 12.5' 8.0' 24.0' 8.0/12 5/8/2005 4527 Casco Ave. Eng. Cottage - 440 sq. ft. - 22.0' 16.0' 10.0' 21.0' 12.0/12 3/14/2006 - - 4507 Drexel Ave. Eng. Cottage 457 sq. ft. 16.9' 12.9' 8.9' 24.0' 8.0/12 9/11/2006 4526 Casco Ave. Norm./Eng.Tud. 524 sq. ft. 15.0' 11.5' 7.5' N/A 8.0/12 10/10/2006 4624 Drexel Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 576 sq. ft. 18.0' 13.4' 8.75' 26.0' 8.0/12 11/24/2006 4605 Wooddale Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. ge 576 sq. ft. - 20.0' i 14.6' 9.3' 26.0' 8.0/12 3/13/2007 - - 4631 Casco Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 546 sq. ft. 18.0' 13.5' 8.5' 23.5' 8.0/12 5/8/2007 4609 Arden Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 528 sq. ft. 19.0' 13.8' 8.75' 26.0' 10.0/12 5/8/2007 4912 Arden Ave. Eng. Cottage 528 sq. ft. 14.5' 11.5' hip 8.5' N/A 6.0/12 5/8/2007 4523 Casco Ave. Eng. Cottage 528 sq. ft. 18.0' 13.4' 9.0' 22.5' 8.0/12 6/12/2007 4622 Casco Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 400 sq. ft. 16.0' 12.5' 8.5' NIA 8,0/12 6/12/2007 4512 Wooddale Ave. New Eng. Col. - 672 sq. ft. - 22.5' 15.5' 9.0' 30.0' 10.0/12 7/10/2007 - ti 4626 Bruce Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 528 sq. ft. 16.75' 13.0' 8.7' 22.5' 7.0/12 9/11/2007 4629 Bruce Ave. - Eng. Cot. I Norm. - 21 - 583 sq. ft. 15.5' 9.0' 25.5' 11.0/12 2/11/2008 4600 Edina Blvd. Eng. Tudor 476 sq. ft. a: 21.9' 14.0' 8.0' 25.5' 12.0/12 5/13/2008 oil - 4513 Moorland Ave. Eng. Tudor 572 sq. ft. 19.0' 14.0' 9.0' 26.5' 10&12.0/12 5/13/2008 4 6 3 3 D re x e l A ve . E n g . T u d or 50 0 sq . ft . 19 .58 ' 14 .4 ' 8.6' N /A 14/12 6/10/2 0 0 8 4 5 12 C a sc o A ve . A m er. C ol. R e v. 57 6 sq . ft . 16 .4 5 ' 12 ' 7' 25.4 ' 9.0/12 8/12/20 08 4 5 11 E d in a B lvd . E n g. C o tt ag e - 6 5 0 sq . ft. 23.7 5 ' 16 .4 ' 8.4 ' 26.5' 14 .0'12 8/12/20 0 8 - - - 4 6 2 3 D re xe l A ve . Eng. C o t./T ud or 4 8 3 sq .ft . 16 .2 9 ' 12 .5' hip 8.8' N /A 8.0 /12 10/14 /20 0 8 4 5 17 D re x e l A ve . E n g . C o tt a g e 59 8 sq .ft . 15 .6' 12 .2 5 ' 8.9' 24' 6.0 /12 10/14 /20 08 4 6 15 W o o d d a le A ve . A m er. C o l. R e v. 52 8 sq. ft . 18 .0' 13 ' 9' 24.5' 8.0/12 12/15 /2008 4 6 3 4 C a s c o A ve . E n g . T u d or 440 sq . ft . 16 .3 3 ' 11.3' 8.3' N /A N /A 1/13/20 0 9 4 5 2 8 A rd e n A ve . A m er. C ol. R e v. 528 sq . ft . 16 .8 3 ' 13 .16 ' 9.16 ' 24.5' 7.0 /12 4 /14 /200 9 4 6 0 0 W o o d a le A v e . A m er. C ol. R e v. 62 4 sq . ft . 18 .9' 13.9' 9.3' 2 8 .0' 8.0 /12 5/12/2 00 9 4 6 1 1 Ar d en A ve . E n g . G e o ./F re nch 624 sq . ft . 18 .88 ' 13 .4 5 ' 8.16 ' 24.75 ' 9.0 /12 7/14/2 009 4 6 2 5 C a sc o A ve . T ud o r 4 0 4 sq .ft . 17 .62' 12 .4 1' 8' 2 1.5' 10.0 /12 8/11/20 0 9 4 5 19 A rd e nA ve . A m er. C o l. R e v. 4 84 sq .ft . 19 .6 13 .6' 7 .0 ' 23' 12 .0 /12 2/2/2010 4 5 12 C a sc o A v e . A m er. C o l. R e v . 57 6 sq.ft . 16 .9' 11 .5' 7 .0' 24 .6' 9 .0/12 10 /12/2010 4 6 2 8 C a s co A ve . E n g. T u d o r 4 6 2.2 5 sq .ft . 18 .0' 12'1 7.8 3 ' 22.33' 10 .0 /12 4/12/2011 4 6 2 3 C a s co A ve . E n g. T u d o r 44 0 sq.ft . 17 .2' 13.4' 9.25 ' 23 ' 9.0/12 5/17/2011 4 5 11 Br u c e A v e . Ita lian R e n . R e v. 57 6 sq .ft . 13 .5' 11 .5' 8.75' N /A 4.0 /12 12 /13/2011 4 6 2 0 M o o rla n d A ve . E n g . T u d or 545 .5 sq .ft . 18 .0' 14 .5' 8' 22' 9.0 /12 1/10/2012 4 6 2 4 Br u ce A ve . T u d o r 4 8 4 sq .ft . 16 .5' 12 .75 ' 9' N /A 7 &12 /12 6/12/2012 4 6 2 7 C a s co A v e . A m . G eo /F e d . R e v. 50 4 sq.ft . 17 .66 ' 14 .25' 8.75 ' N /A 8.0 /12 1/8/2013 - 4504 Drexel Ave. Mediter./ Norman 528 sq. ft. 19.5' 14.5' 9.5' N/A 9.0/12 3/12/2013 - - -- Averages Approved 532.9 sq.ft. 18.4' 13.8' 8.6' 24.' 8.4/12 Jo] vu comp@at{le £ Se ye le p0er( t) rt .h / e«et kr et Joly\ M u f ue, k- Sol po-el s m petil 9ye « Si)e, I 3 Office of the Revisor of Statutes 2020 Minn esota Statutes Authenticate [DE 394.27 CREATION AND DUTIES OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. Subdivision 1. When controls adopted. Whenever a board of county commissioners shall have adopted official controls it shall at the same time as the adoption of such controls create a board of adjustment by ordinance. Subd. 2. Procedure, qualifications. The board of adjustment shall consist of at least three but not more than seven members, including at least one member from the unincorporated area of the county, whose appointment, term of office, or removal from the board shall be as provided in the ordinance creating the board of adjustment; provided that no elected officer of the county nor any employee of the board of commissioners shall serve as a member of the board of adjustment and that one member of such board of adjustment shall also be a member of any planning commission appointed under the provisions of sections 394.21 to 394.37. In an ordinance creating a three-member board of adjustment, provision may be made for one alternate member. The alternate board member shall, when directed by the chair, attend all meetings of the board and participate fully in its activities but shall not vote on any issue unless authorized to do so by the chair. The chair shall authorize the alternate board member to vote on an issue when a regular member is absent, physically incapacitated, abstains because of a possible conflict of interest, or is prohibited by law from voting on that issue. Any question of whether a particular issue involves a conflict of interest sufficient to disqualify a regular board member from voting thereon shall be decided by majority vote of all regular board members except the member who is being challenged. In the ordinance establishing the board of adjustment provision may be made for removal of any member for nonperformance of duty or misconduct in office and for the filling of vacancies for any unexpired tenn. The regular and alternate members of such board of adjustment may be paid compensation in an amount determined by the county board and may be paid their necessary expenses in attending meetings of the board and in the conduct of the business of the board. Subd. 3. Officers. The board of adjustment shall elect a chair and vice-chair from among its members and shall appoint a secretary who need not be a member of a board. It shall adopt rules for the transaction of its business and shall keep a public record of its transaction, findings, and determinations. Subd. 4. Meetings. The meetings of the board of adjustment shall be held at the call of the chair and at such other times as the board in its rules of procedure may specify. Subd. 5. Authority. The board of adjustment shall have the authority to order the issuance of variances, hear and decide appeals from and review any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by any administrative official charged with enforcing any ordinance adopted pursuant to the provision of sections 394,2] to 39437, order the issuance of permits for buildings in areas designated for future public use on an official map, and perfonn such other duties as required by the official controls. Such appeal may be taken by any person aggrieved or by any officer, department, board or bureau of a town, municipality, county, or state. In exercising its powers under this subdivision, the board of adjustment shall take into consideration the town board's recommendation when the board of adjustment's decision directly affects land within the town. Subd. 6. Appeals. An appeal from any order, requirement, decision, or determination of any administrative official shall be taken in such time as shall be prescribed by the ordinance creating the board of adjustment by filing with the board of adjustment a notice of appeal specifying the grounds thereof. The board of adjustment shall fix a reasonable time for the hearing of the appeal and give due notice thereof to the appellant and the officer from whom the appeal is taken and to the public and decide the same within a reasonable time which shall be defined in the ordinance establishing the board of adjustment. An appeal stays all proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from unless the board of adjustment to whom the appeal is taken certifies that by reason of the facts stated in the certificate a stay would cause imminent peril to life or property. The board of adjustment may reverse or affirm wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision, or determination appealed from and to that end shall have all the powers of the officer from whom the appeal was taken and may direct the issuance of a permit. The reasons for the board's decision shall be stated in writing. Subd. 7. Variances; practical difficulties. The board of adjustment shall have the exclusive power to order the issuance of variances from the requirements of any official control including restrictions placed on nonconformities. Variances shall only be pennitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the official control and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the official control. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not_constitute_pracial difficulties. Practical difficulties include., are not limited to, inade uate cess to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as de med in section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the official controls. No variance may be granted that would allow any use that is not allowed in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. The board of adjustment may impose conditions in the granting of variances. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. Subd. 8. Filing orders. A certified copy of any order issued by the board of adjustment acting upon an appeal from an order, requirement, decision or determination by an administrative official, or a request for a variance, shall be recorded with the county recorder or registrar of titles. The order issued by the board of adjustment shall include the legal description of the property involved. The board by ordinance shall designate the county official or employee responsible for meeting the requirements of this subdivision. Subd. 9. Appeal to district court. All decisions by the board of adjustment in granting variances or in hearing appeals from any administrative order, requirement, decision, or detennination shall be final except that any aggrieved person or persons, or any department, board or commission of the jurisdiction or of the state shall have the right to appeal within 30 days, after receipt of notice of the decision, to the district court in the county in which the land is located on questions of law and fact. History: 1959 c 559 Z ; 1963 c 692 s 5; 1974 c 5712 3-29; 1976 c 181 s 2; 1978 c 786s 13; Ex /979 c 2 40; 1981 c 356s 248; 1984c392s I; 1986c444; 1987c312art Is !Osubd 1;2005c4s97; 20 11 c 19s I Official Publication of the State of Minnesota Revisor of Statutes Su bd. 7 .Variances; practical difficulties. The board of adjustment shall have the exclusive power to order the issuance of variances from the requirements of any official control including restrictions placed on nonconformities. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the official control and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the official control. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means,-that the property ower proposes to use the property in l"Reasonable mannerot_permitted by an official control; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the official controls. No variance may be granted that would allow any use that is not allowed in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. The board of adjustment m ay im pose conditions in the granting of variances. A c o n d itio n m u s t b e d ir e c tl y related to and m ust bear a rough proportionality to the im pact created by the . var1ance. Elevation Drawing Stucco Siding To Match Home Shingle Color To Match Home 2 East Wall 24 North Wall 8'4 26 82 3 2 South Wall 22 West Wall 4 {} ck@tu[ Eleeot COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT DETACHED GARAGE STATISTICS Square Height at Height at Height at Address Architecture Footage Peak Midpoint Eave Ridge Pitch of Roof Date 4625 Drexel Ave. Eng.Cottage 473 sq. ft. 21.2' 14.5' 8.0' 23.0' 15.0/12 5/13/2003 4910 Arden Ave. Eng. Cottage 484 sq, ft, 19.5' 14.5' 8.5' ? ? 7/2/2003 4506 Bruce Ave. New Eng. Col. 528 sq. ft. 19.0' 14.5' ? ? ? 9/9/2003 4624 Arden Ave. Eng. Cottage 576 sq. ft. 18.0' 13.0' 8.7' 27.0' 8.0/12 5/11/2004 4517 Arden Ave. Eng. Cottage 539 sq. ft. 23.0' 15.5' 6.5' ? 12.0/12 6/8/2004 4526 Drexel Ave. Eng.Cottage 529 sq. ft. 18.0' 14.0 hip 7.5' N/A 10.0/12 7/13/2004 4619 Drexel Ave. Eng. Cottage 491 sq. ft. 20.0' 15.0' hip 10.0' N/A 12.0/12 9/13/2004 4903 Bruce Ave. Eng. Cottage 660 sq. ft. 23.0' 16.0' 9.0' 33.5' 14.0/12 10/12/2004 4604 Bruce Ave. Med./ltal. Ren 484 sq, ft, 17.0' 13.5' 10.0' N/A 4.0/12 4/12/2005 4607 Moorland Ave. Norm./Eng.Tud. 611sq. ft. 20.6' 15' hip 9.5' N/A 10.0/12 5/8/2005 4603 Moorland Ave. Eng. Cottage 644 sq. ft. 18.1' 14' hip 10.1.' N/A 8.0/12 5/8/2005 4615 Casco Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 484 sq. ft. 16.5' 12.5' 8.0' 24.0' 8.0/12 5/8/2005 4527 Casco Ave. Eng. Cottage 440 sq. ft. 22.0' 16.0' 10.0' 21.0' 12.0/12 3/14/2006 4507 Drexel Ave. Eng. Cottage 457 sq. ft. 16.9' 12.9' 8.9' 24.0' 8.0/12 9/11/2006 4526 Casco Ave. Norm./Eng.Tud. 524 sq. ft. 15.0' 11.5' 7.5' N/A 8.0/12 10/10/2006 4624 Drexel Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 576 sq. ft. 18.0' 13.4 8.75' 26.0' 8.0/12 11/24/2006 4605 Wooddale Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 576 sq. ft. 20.0' 14.6' 9.3' 26.0' 8.0/12 3/13/2007 4631 Casco Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 546 sq. ft. 18.0' 13.5' 8.5' 23.5' 8.0/12 5/8/2007 4609 Arden Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 528 sq. ft. 19.0' 13.8' 8.75' 26.0' 10.0/12 5/8/2007 4912 Arden Ave. Eng. Cottage 528 sq. ft. 14.5' 11.5' hip 8.5' N/A 6.0/12 5/8/2007 4523 Casco Ave. Eng. Cottage 528 sq. ft. 18.0' 13.4' 9.0' 22.5' 8.0/12 6/12/2007 4622 Casco Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 400 sq. ft. 16.0' 12.5' 8.5' N/A 8,0/12 6/12/2007 4512 Wooddale Ave. New Eng. Col. 672 sq. ft. 22.5' 15.5' 9.0' 30.0' 10.0/12 7/10/2007 4626 Bruce Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 528 sq. ft. 16.75' 13.0' 8.7' 22.5' 7.0/12 9/11/2007 4629 Bruce Ave. Eng. Cot. / Norm. 583 sq. ft. 21' 15.5' 9.0' 25.5' 11.0/12 2/11/2008 4600 Edina Blvd. Eng. Tudor 476 sq. ft. 21.9' 14.0' 8.0' 25.5' 12.0/12 5/13/2008 4513 Moorland Ave. Eng. Tudor 572 sq. ft. 19.0' 14.0' 9.0' 26.5' 10812.0/12 5/13/2008 Submitted to staff 6/18/21 4633 Drexel Ave. Eng. Tudor 500 sq. ft. 19.58' 14.4' 8.6' N/A 14/12 6/10/2008 4512 Casco Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 576 sq. ft. 16.45' 12' 7 25.4 9.0/12 8/12/2008 4511 Edina Blvd. Eng. Cottage 650 sq. ft. 23.75' 16.4' 8.4' 26.5' 14.0'12 8/12/2008 4623 Drexel Ave. Eng. Cot./Tudor 483 sq.ft. 16.29' 12.5' hip 8.8' N/A 8.0/12 10/14/2008 4517 Drexel Ave. Eng. Cottage 598 sq.ft. 15.6' 12.25 8.9' 24' 6.0/12 10/14/2008 4615 Wooddale Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 528 sq. ft. 18.0' 13' 9' 24.5' 8.0/12 12/15/2008 4634 Casco Ave. Eng. Tudor 440 sq. ft. 16.33' 11.3' 8.3' N/A NIA 1/13/2009 4528 Arden Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 528 sq. ft. 16.83' 13.16' 9.16' 24.5' 7.0/12 4/14/2009 4600 Woodale Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 624 sq. ft. 18.9' 13.9' 9.3' 28.0' 8.0/12 5/12/2009 4611 Arden Ave. Eng. Geo./French 624 sq. ft. 18.88' 13.45' 8.16' 24.75' 9.0/12 7/14/2009 4625 Casco Ave. Tudor 404 sq.ft. 17.62' 12.41 8' 21.5' 10.0/12 8/11/2009 4519 ArdenAve. Amer. Col. Rev. 484 sq.ft. 19.6 13.6' 7.0' 23' 12.0/12 2/2/2010 4512 Casco Ave. Amer. Col. Rev. 576 sq.ft. 16.9' 11.5' 7.0 24.6' 9.0/12 10/12/2010 4628 Casco Ave. Eng. Tudor 462.25 sq.ft. 18.0' 121" 7.83' 22.33' 10.0/12 4/12/2011 4623 Casco Ave. Eng. Tudor 440 sq.ft. 17.2' 13.4' 9.25' 23' 9.0/12 5/17/2011 4511 Bruce Ave. Italian Ren. Rev. 576 sq.ft. 13.5' 11.5' 8.75' NIA 4.0/12 12/13/2011 4620 Moorland Ave. Eng. Tudor 545.5 sq.ft. 18.0' 14.5 8' 22' 9.0/12 1/10/2012 4624 Bruce Ave. Tudor 484 sq.ft. 16.5' 12.75° 9' N/A 7 &12/12 6/12/2012 4627 Casco Ave. Am. Geo/Fed. Rev. 504 sq.ft. 17.66' 14.25 8.75' N/A 8.0/12 1/8/2013 4504 Drexel Ave. Mediter./ Norman 528 sq. ft. 19.5' 14.5' 9.5' N/A 9.0/12 3/12/2013 Averages Approved 532.9 sq.ft. 18.4' 13.8' 8.6' 24.' 8.4/12 Submitted by applicant 6/18/21 Average detached garage height in Country Club per City of Edina internal document (attached) 220 inches (18’4”) Plus 10% allowance 220 inches plus 22 inches = 242 inches (20’2”) Maximum garage height allowed in Country Club without variance: 20’2” Garage roof height proposed at 4628 Bruce: 20’4” Difference: 2 inches Ed ina, Hennep in, MetroG IS, Edin a, Henn epin , MetroGIS | © WSB & Associates2013, Henn epin County, Edin a, © WSB & Associa tes 2013 462 8 Bruce Ave June 2, 2021 1 in = 50 f t / ORDINANCE NO. 2013-7 AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING THE R-1,SINGLE- DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT,AND R-2, DOUBLE DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDING COVERAGE,SETBACK, HEIGHT&GENERAL REGULATIONS 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 Residential)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 lot is applied for. Building Height or Structure Height. (Single & Two Dwelling Unit Buildings)The distance measured from the average existing ground elevation adjoining the building at the front building line to the highest point on a 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 lot is applied for. Residential Maintenance Access. For a single and double dwelling unit, a clear flat walkway from a front yard to a rear yard. This area allows outside pedestrian access and space to bring equipment from a front yard to a rear yard without any encroachment on neighboring property. Section 2.Subsection 850.07. Subd. 7. is hereby amended as follows: Subd. 7. Drainage, Retaining Walls&Site Access. 1. Drainage. No person shall obstruct or divert the natural flow of runoff so as to harm the public health, safety or general welfare. Surface water runoff shall be properly conveyed into storm sewers, watercourses, ponding areas or other public facilities. As part of the building permit, the applicant must submit a grading and erosion control plan along with a stormwater management plan that is signed by a licensed professional engineer. The stormwater management plan must detail how stormwater will be controlled to prevent damage to adjacent property and adverse impacts to the public stormwater drainage system. The plans must be approved by the city engineer and the permit holder must adhere to the approved plans. Ordinance No. 2013-7 Page 2 2. Retaining Walls. All retaining walls must be shown on a grading plan as part of a building permit application. Plans must demonstrate materials to be used for the retaining wall construction. Retaining walls taller than four (4) feet must meet a three 3)foot setback. 3. Site Access. In an R-1 or R-2 Zoning District, a residential maintenance access of at least three (3) feet in width is required on one side of a single or two dwelling unit from the front yard to the rear yard. Section 3.Subsection 850.11.Subd. 6. is hereby amended as follows: Subd.6 Requirements for Building Coverage,Setbacks and Height. 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. 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. 4.Building Coverage shall include all principal or accessory buildings, including, but not limited to: a. Decks and patios. The first 150 square feet of an unenclosed deck or patio shall not be included when computing building coverage. b. Gazebos C. Balconies. d. Breezeways. e. Porches. f. Accessory recreational facilities constructed above grade, such as paddle tennis courts. The following improvements shall be excluded when computing building coverage: a. Driveways and sidewalks, but not patios, subject to 3.a. above. b. Parking lots and parking ramps. C. Accessory recreational facilities not enclosed by solid walls and not covered by a roof, including outdoor swimming pools,tennis courts and shuffleboard courts. Ordinance No. 2013-7 Page 3 d. Unenclosed and uncovered steps and stoops less than 50 square feet. e. Overhanging eaves and roof projections not supported by posts or pillars. Section 4.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. 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. 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 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 Ordinance No. 2013-7 Page 4 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 S. This Ordinance is effective upon its passage and publication. First Reading: July 16, 2013 Second Reading: August 5, 2013 Published: August 15, 2013 i Attest ebra A. Mangen, City e& ames B. viand, Mayor PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE EDINA SUN CURRENT,THURSDAY,AUGUST 15, 2013 SEND TWO AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATION BILL TO EDINA CITY CLERK City of Edina 2. Retaining Walls.All retaining walls be included for purposes of this para- must be shown on a grading plan as graph. Official Publication) part of a building permit application. D.Minimum Building Width.No more ORDINANCE NO.2D13-7 Plans must demonstrate materials to than 30 percent of the length,in the ag- AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT be used Retainfor theing retaining wall n four( 4) gregate,of a single dwelling unit build-tion.Retaining walls taller than four(4) 9 9 REGARDING THE R-1,SINGLE- feet must meet a three(3)foot setback. ing shall measure less than 18 feet in DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT,AND R- width as measured from the exterior of MEDIA 2,DOUBLE DWELLING UNIT 3.Site Access.In an R-1 or R-2 Zoning the exterior walls. DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR District,a residential maintenance ac- E.Parking Ramps Prohibited.No parkBUILDINGCOVERAGE,SETBACK, cess of at least three(3)feet in width is ing ramp shall be constructed in theHEIGHT&GENERAL required on one side of a single or two 1 District.AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION REGULATIONS dwelling unit from the front yard to the THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA OR- rear yard. F.Temporary retail sales of evergreen STATE OF MINNESOTA ) DAINS: Section 3.Subsection 850.11.Subd.6. products from Conditional Use proper- Section 1.Subsection 850.03.Subd.3. is hereby amended as follows: ties SS. Definitions is hereby amended as fol- 1.The Manager may grant a permit forCOUNTYOFHENNEPIN ) lows: Subd. 6 Requirements for Building Coverage,Setbacks and Height. temporary retail sales of evergreen Jeremy Bradfield, being duly sworn on an products,if: Building Height or Structure Height. Commercial,Industrial and High Den- A.Building Coverage. a.the owner of the property or other oath, states or affirms that he Is the sityResidential)Thedistance measured 1.Lots 9,000 Square Feet or Greater in non-profit group approved by the Advertising Director of the newspaper(s) from the average existing ground ele- Area. Building coverage shall be not owner conducts the sale. vation adjoining the building at the front more than 25 percent for all buildingsknownasbuildinglinetothetopofthecorniceofandstructures.On lots with an existing b.the duration of the sale does not ex-a flat roof,to the deck line of a mansard conditional use, if the combined total ceed 45 consecutive days and does Edina Sun-Current roof,to a point on the roof directly area occupied by all accessory build- not start before November 15 in any above the highest wall of a shed roof, ings and structures, excluding at- year. to the uppermost point on a round or tached garages,is 1,000 square feet or c.the sale area is located in a Suitable other arch-type roof,or to the average greater,a conditional use permit is re- off-street location that does not inter- distance of the highest gable on a quired. fere with traffic circulation on the site or and has full knowledge of the facts stated pitched or hip roof.References in this 2 Lots Less Than 9,000 Square Feet in obstruct parking spaces needed by theSectiontobuildingheightshallincludeqprincipaluseonthesite.below: and mean structure height,and if the Area. Building coverage shall be not p p A)The newspaper has complied with all of structure is other than a building,the more than 30 percent for all buildings d.the sale area is not located within height shall be measured from said av- and structures,provided,however,that 200 feet of a property zoned and usedtherequirementsconstitutingqualifica- erage existing ground elevation to the the area occupied by all buildings and for residential occupancy. tion as a qualified newspaper as provid- highest point of the structure."Existing structures shall not exceed 2,250 ground elevation"means the lowest of square feet.e.the hours of operation do not extend ed by Minn. Stat. §331A.02, §331A.07, the following elevations:(1)the gradebeyond 10:00 p.m.3.The combined total area occupied and other applicable laws as amended. approved at the time of the subdivision by all accessory buildings and struc- f. signage is limited to one sign per public notice that IS at- creatingthelot,(2)the grade atthe time tures, excluding attached garages, street frontage with an aggregate signB)The Printed P the last demolition permit was issued shall not exceed 1,000 square feet for area not exceeding 100 square feet. tached was published In said neWspa- for a principal structure that was on the lots used for single dwelling unit build-lot, 3 the rade at the time the build- gl Additions to or replacement of,sin- per(s) once each week, for One suc-9 ings. le dwelling unit buildingsand build-ing permit for a principal structure on 9 9 cessive week(s);it was first published on the lot is applied for. 4. Building Coverage shall include all ings containing two dwelling units.For principal or accessory buildings, in- additions,alterations and changes to, Thursday, the 15 day of Building Height or Structure Height. cluding,but not limited to: or rebuilds of existing single dwelling August 2013, and was there- (single&Two Dwelling Unit Build- unit buildings and buildings containing after printed and published on ever ings)The distance measured from the a. Decks and patios. The first 150 two dwellings,the first floor elevation p P Y average existing ground elevation ad- square feet of an unenclosed deck or may not be more than one foot above Thursday to and including Thursday,the joining the building at the front building patio shall not be included when com- the existing first floor elevation.Ifasplit line to the highest point on a roof.Ref- puting building coverage. level dwelling is torn down and a newdayof2013; erences in this Section to building b.Gazebos home is built,the new first floor or entry and printed below is a copy of the lower height shall include and mean structure level elevation may not be more than case alphabet from A to Z, both inclu- height,gdifthe structure isother than c.Balconies. one foot above the front entry elevation a building, the height shall be mea- of the home that was torn down.Sub- sive, which is hereby acknowledged as sured from said average existing d.Breezeways. ject to Section 850.11 Subd.2. I.the beingthe size and kind of a used in ground elevation to the highest point of e.Porches.first floor elevation may be increasedYPthestructure. "Existing ground eleva- more than one(1)foot.The provisions the composition and publication of the tion"means the lowest of the following f.Accessory recreational facilities con- of this paragraph shall apply to all sin- elevations: (1)the grade approved at structed above grade,such as paddle gle dwelling unit buildings and build- the time of the subdivision creating the tennis courts. ings containing two dwelling units in- abcdef hi'klmno rstuvwx z lot,(2)the grade at the time the last de- The following improvements shall be cluding units in the flood plain overlay91pqYmolitionpermitwasissuedforaprinci- excluded when computing building district.Any deviation from the require-pal structure that was on the lot,(3)the coverage: ments of this paragraph shall require a grade at the time the building permit for variance. a principal structure on the lot is ap- a. Driveways and sidewalks, but not Section 5.This Ordinance is effectivepliedfor. patios,subject to 3.a.above. upon its passage and publication. Residential Maintenance Access.For a b.Parking lots and parking ramps. First Reading:Jul 16,2013singleanddoubledwellingunit,a clear g y flat walkway from a front yard to a rear c.Accessory recreational facilities not Second Reading:August 5,2013 yard.This area allows outside pedestri- enclosed by solid walls and not cov- 9 9 an access and space to bring equip- ered by a roof,including outdoor swim- Published:August 15,2013 BY: ment from a front yard to a rear yard ming pools,tennis courts and shuffle- without any encroachment on neigh- board courts. Attest Advertising Director Debra A. B Hovland, City Clerkgboringproperty. d. Unenclosed and uncovered steps James B.Hovland,Mayor Section 2.Subsection 850.07.Subd.7. and stoops less than 50 square feet. is hereby amended as follows: e.Overhanging eaves and roof projec- (Aug.15,2013)D1-Ord2013-7 Subscribed and sworn to or affirmed Subd. 7. Drainage, Retaining Walls& tions not supported by posts or pillars. before me on this 15 day of Site Access.Section 4. Subsection 850.11. Subd. August 2013. 1.Drainage.No person shall obstruct 7.A.is hereby amended as follows: or divert the natural flow of runoff so as Subd.7 Special Requirements.In addi- to harm the public health, safety or tion to the general requirements de- general welfare. Surface water runoff scribed in Subsection 850.07,the fol- 7 shall be properly conveyed into storm lowing special requirements shall L//sewers, watercourses, ponding areas apply.or other public facilities. Notary Public art of the buildin permit,the A. Special Setback Requirements for As P 9 P P- Single Dwelling Unit Lots. plicant must submit a grading and ero- sion control plan along with a stormwa- B. One Dwelling Unit Per Single ter management plan that is signed by Dwelling Unit Lot. No more than one a licensed professional engineer.The dwelling unit shall be erected,placed or Eago,- JULIA I. HELKENN stormwater management plan must used on any lot unless the lot is subdi- detail how stormwater will be con- vided into two or more lots pursuant to NOTARY PUBLIC•MINNESOTA trolled to prevent damage to adjacent Section 810 of this Code. property and adverse impacts to the C.Basements.All single dwelling unitMyCOMM.Exp,Jan,31,2015 public stormwater drainage system. buildings shall be constructed with a The plans must be approved by the city basement having a gross floor areaengineerandthepermitholdermustequaltoatleast50percentofthegross adhere to the approved plans. floor area of the story next above.The floor area of accessory uses shall not 4627 Casco Building Permit Plans 4629 Casco Building Permit Plans Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Minutes City of Edina, Minnesota Heritage Preservation Commission VIRTUAL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2021 I. Call to Order Chair Schilling called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call were members Lonnquist, Pollock, Cundy, Knudsen, Nymo, Everson, Hassenstab and Chair Schilling. Emily Bodeker, staff liaison, was also in attendance. III. Approval of Meeting Agenda Motion made by Lonnquist seconded by Hassenstab to approve the meeting agenda as presented. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. Approval of Meeting Minutes Motion made by Pollock, seconded by Knudsen to approve the May 11, 2021 meeting minutes as presented. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. Reports and Recommendations A. COA: 4628 Bruce Avenue-New Detached Garage Staff introduced the COA request for the construction of a new detached garage at 4628 Bruce Avenue. The applicant and homeowners, Mike and Tracie Rossman, answered questions from the Commission. Commissioner Hassenstab left the meeting at 7:20 pm. Motion made by Lonnquist seconded by Nymo to approve the COA for a new detached garage at 4628 Bruce Avenue subject to the following conditions: • Two windows that are proportionate in size and style to the home are installed on the east elevation above the garage door opening. • A window or permanent architectural detail such as timbering be installed to the west elevation. • A permanent architectural detail (window, timbering, bump out, etc.) be installed on the north elevation of the proposed garage. • Window or permanent architectural detail added to the south elevation or move the door so that there isn’t a portion of wall that is undecorated longer than 16 feet. • Any changes to the proposed plans would require review from the Heritage Preservation Commission. Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: • A date-built plaque is required to be installed on the new garage. • The maximum height for the garage is 18 feet or a variance needs to be approved by the Planning Commission for the height of the garage. All Voted ate. The motion carried. B. Human Services Funding Task Force Volunteer Commissioner Pollock volunteered to be on the Human Services Funding task force. C. 2022 Work Plan Brainstorm The Commission began gathering ideas for their 2022 Work Plan items. Staff will gather ideas and include them in the July Commission packet. D. Regular Meeting Schedule Change Motion by Lonnquist second by Pollock to change the August HPC meeting from Monday, August 9 to Tuesday, August 10th at 7:00 pm. Staff informed the commission that more information on in person and hybrid meetings is to come. The commission discussed meeting earlier than 7:00 but there was not consensus from the group that a new time would work. VII. Chair and Member Comments Commissioners provided updates on their 2021 work plan items. • Commissioner Schilling is gathering photos for the virtual tour. • Commissioner Everson suggested creating a list of architectural details to help applicants. The Commission agreed to add it to the 2022 workplan brainstorm list. Commissioner Nymo left at 8:40 pm. VIII. Staff Comments: As requested, staff gave an update on the 4630 Drexel project. IX. Adjournment Draft Minutes☒ Approved Minutes☐ Approved Date: Motion made by Pollock seconded by Lonnquist to adjourn the meeting at 9:00. All voted aye. The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Emily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily BodekerEmily Bodeker Date: June 23, 2021 Agenda Item #: V.D. To:P lanning C ommission Item Type: R eport and R ecommendation F rom:C ary Teague, C ommunity Development Director Item Activity: Subject:P UBLI C HEAR I NG : C onditional Us e P ermit with Varianc es – 6200 Interlachen Boulevard 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: R ecommend the C ity C ouncil approve the Conditional U se P ermit subject to the findings and conditions outlined in the staff report. I N TR O D U C TI O N: I nterlachen C ountry Club is requesting a C onditional Use P ermit to expand the boundaries of the C ountry C lub and add a new parking lot and expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. T here are two single- family homes, owned by the C ountry Club, that would continue as single-family homes that would serve as a buffer to the single-family homes to the west. A gate would be constructed at the end of Waterman Avenue, just past the single-family homes owned by the Country C lub. (See attached narrative and plans.) T he gate would be closed for access to the Club from Waterman for the purpose of employees, members, guests, and delivery trucks to use the main entrance off Interlachen Boulevard. T he Country C lub would be constructing the new cul-de-sac and roadway improvements at their expense. A Conditional U se P ermit is required for the expanded parking area and boundaries of the Country C lub. G olf C ourses are a conditionally permitted use in the R-1, Single-D welling Unit D istrict. AT TAC HME N T S: Description Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report 6-17-21 Noon Staff Memos Applicant Narrative Proposed Plans Frimerman - Letter to City of Edina from Malkers on Gunn Martin Site Location Zoning Map Comprehens ive Plan - Land Use Plan Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 17 June 2021 Public Hearing Comments-Interlachen Country Club CUP Better Together Edina Project: Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit for Interlachen Country Club to expand the boundaries of the Country Club and add a new parking lot and expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. VISITORS 196 CONTRIBUTORS 127 RESPONSES 134 4 Registered 1 Unverified 122 Anonymous 4 Registered 1 Unverified 129 Anonymous Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 27, 2021 15:27:09 pm Last Seen:May 27, 2021 15:27:09 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Connie Brockway Q2.Address 6301 Maloney Ave. Edina MN 55343 Q3.Comment Our property is directly adjacent to the south boundary of the proposed parking lot. In the past months, I have been reading about the city of Edina laudable commitment to providing lower to mid-range housing (StarTribune 4/18/21). I have attended meetings where the city council has voiced strong opposition to losing green space in our city and been so gratified by their stances. I hope the City Council continues to stand by their stated tenets because here comes ICC with plans to plow up acres of gorgeous lawn and garden, shrubs and 100 year old pine trees, space my neighbors and I value, yards in which our children play. All for no other reason than to make a SEASONALLY COVENIENT parking lot for “employees and overflow guests.” I want to reiterate that more clearly: ICC wants to insert a parking into the very heart of my neighborhood that will 1) FOREVER changing our neighborhood’s character 2) FOREVER trade treasured and increasingly rare green space in Edina for cement 3) FOREVER turn Waterman from a family neighborhood into an ICC adjunct 4) FOREVER depreciate our property values 5) FOREVER pollute our night skies with parking lot lights 6) Allow ICC to monitor our yards with security cameras 7) Put our families and our property at increased risk of crime by insering a parking lot into our midst (according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics 11% of crimes occur in parking lots) and especially a lot like this one, which is HIDDEN behind their tennis courts, out of view of ANY of their buildings 8) FOREVER destroy quality affordable housing currently occupying those lots And for what? So for a few months out of the year some people don’t have to walk an extra block. We live here twelve months out of the year. We look out our windows at that beautiful green space every single day from morning to night. How can ICC’s desire for more SEASONALLY CONVENIENT parking override our day in day out lives? It’s my opinion that ICC’s stated reason for creating this lot is nothing but a big lie. This isn’t about providing their caddies with closer parking. This is about expansion. ICC has told us its membership is currently capped. They assured us that the lot “will be designated for employees, caddies, and valet overflow” BUT “we are not planning to “ban” members from using the lot.” That’s a nice loophole. ICC only employs 100 caddies on a seasonal basis with maybe 20 work at a time? Why all the extra lots? Because their plan includes a new putting green and a driving range and the proposed lot includes a walkway providing direct access to the tennis court. When I asked why they needed access from the “employee lot” to the tennis courts, their response was “the connection to the tennis courts was designed for the safety of our staff; it creates a shorter path to the clubhouse via sidewalk so they do not need to walk on the street.” But there IS no street in this plan. The lot ends right at the before proposed the cul de sac. And it isn’t appreciably short. In fact, in some cases its longer This lot is for the convenience of their members to more easily access the tennis court, proposed driving range and putting green. I’ve been taking pictures every day of the gravel lot that IC built in place of the house they already bulldozed and spoken to caddies walking down Waterman. Right now, that little lot is being used by members. There’s no reason to think it won’t be in the future. ( I’d be happy to share the pictures with you) It’s tiny now and it generally holds around 15 cars. Can you imagine the headlights of 150 cars sweeping around as people drive in and out (because the tennis courts are lit at night and we know from sad experience – think blaring music—it is used), the noise, the constant light from the security poles, the presence of god-know-who knows who in our backyards at all hours of the night? Or just the intrusive presence of all strangers in our backyards? Additionally worrisome, once ICC plows up the terrain for this lot there is nothing to prevent them from doing whatever they want with it--- a winter hockey rink, tent parties, parking for their barbeque truck and portable “beer hal”, etc. And after everyone moves out of Waterman, what then? ICC bulldozes more houses and grows their membership. I am sorry for the desperation in my tone but I am desperate. Desperate to save what is gorgeous, cool, living green oasis enjoyed by an inclusive, diverse and unique neighborhood. I sincerely hope that the Edina City Council not allow ICC’s desire for a seasonal accommodation of some of their very privileged clientele to supersede the daily well-being and happiness of this wonderful neighborhood. Please do not grant ICC this CUP. Connie Brockway Respondent No:2 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 27, 2021 15:46:14 pm Last Seen:May 27, 2021 15:46:14 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Christine Lamson Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment I AM VERY UPSET FOR THE FAMILIES WHO MAKE UP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. OUR NEIGHBORS WHO ARE ALSO VOTERS! WE D O NOT NEED ANOTHER PARKING LOT WITH FENCING, OBTRUSIVE LIGHTING, INVITING MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR CRIMES AND BREAKINS, REPLACING AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHICH IS HARD TO FIND IN EDINA NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE FIRST PLACE. THIS PARKING LOT WOULD BE PLACED OR PAVED REALLY, RIGHT SMACK DAB IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD! WHAT TYPE OF THINKING IS THAT? ENVIRONMENTAL AND EMOTIONAL IMPACTS ON THE FAMILIES, AND NATURE. ALONG WITH THE SCRAPING OF OUR BEAUTIFUL OASIS OF GREEN OPEN SPACE, CUTTING DOWN VARIETIES OF LEGACY TREES, DESTROYING HABITATS OF BIRDS AND OTHER CREATURES NESTING, MIGRATING, WHO ALSO CALL THIS PROPOSED PARKING/ PAVED LOT SPACE THEIR HOMES, WILL BE REMOVED AND DESTROYED. HOUSES BEING TORN DOWN, FAMILIES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD SUFFERING THE CONSEQUENCES, TO PUT IN A PAVED PARKING LOT WITH POSSIBLE OTHER USES? FOR A PRIVATE GOLF CLUB. THIS DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.... ONCE THEY ARE GONE THEY ARE GONE FOR GOOD! CHRISTINE LAMSON Respondent No:3 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 28, 2021 10:27:17 am Last Seen:May 28, 2021 10:27:17 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Britta Sortland Ryan Q2.Address 513 John Street, Hopkins, MN 55343 Q3.Comment I am writing in regards to the Proposed Non-permeable Valet Parking Lot & Debris Storage proposed by Interlachen Country Club. In this letter, I will explain a bit of my background and my history in Edina and why I am opposed to the proposed plan. I humbly request that you read this with an open mind and look at the impact to the neighborhood, and consider the would-be beneficiaries of the parking lot, and ask, is it truly worth the cost? My husband, Eric, and I purchased our first home at 513 John Street in 2019 from Mary and John Jelnick. The Jelnick’s are an older couple, who raised their 4 children and lived in this home for 40 years. Before that, our home was purchased by a man who converted the building from a church from the 1930s, into the home it is today. We fell in love with the Interlachen neighborhood because of its unique homes, large lots, and park like feel. When we stumbled across 513, we purchased it knowing we had a lot of dollars and sweat equity to put in, but that it’d be worth it for us and for future homeowners because of the yard. When you look out our kitchen window, our three-season porch, family room, or master bedroom right now, we see a beautiful park with large gardens, old trees, and so much wildlife. Since we’ve moved in we’ve see wild turkeys, foxes, coyotes, minks, and have a family of deer that return every summer and make their way from our yard (and much to our neighbors’ dismay – his garden, endearingly nicknamed the local “Whole Foods”) to the pond which would become the proposed parking lot. What we’ve referred to as our homes’ best view would become a valet parking lot for the golf course. My first objection to the parking lot project is on account of the impact to the home values’ and saving affordable homes from being torn down. When we purchased our home in 2019, we loved the sounds on a summer night listening to the hustle and bustle of the club house. We also never expected that our backyard would turn into a parking lot. That is not what we signed up for. At this time, I believe the golf club owned one house North of Waterman Ave, but had not yet purchased the two remaining homes North of Waterman Ave that they now possess. Those homes are currently zoned as Single Dwelling Units and for the sake of our neighborhood, they should remained zoned as such. The houses in our neighborhood are considered more affordable for the area, but are well maintained and taken care of. One of Edina's goal is to save affordable houses from being torn down. There are TWO more affordable houses that would be torn down for seasonal use. My husband and I have also put a lot of TLC, dollar, and sweat equity into our home over the last few months with the goal of not tearing down, but improving the home and making it our own. We were never expecting this news from the golf course. For the reason of our home values and keeping more affordable housing available, I respectfully request you to not approve the proposed parking lot. My second objection to the parking lot project is on account of the wildlife. My husband and I are outdoor enthusiasts, backpacking, camping, fishing, and yearly trips to the boundary waters. Since moving in we’ve found an abundance of wildlife in part due to the large green space and ponds. Eric has gained a new hobby over the past two years and has become a self-proclaimed ornithologist – adding three bird baths, three bird homes, four bird feeders, and two hummingbird feeders since we’ve moved in. It would be a fair statement to say he’s become a bit obsessed with the birds! I would ask that some sort of wildlife study be done prior to voting on the parking lot project to see what type of impact it would have to the lesser seen residents. We've got wild turkeys, a family of 5 deer that come back every summer, herrings that fly to our pond, and numerous other creatures that call our backyards their home. My final and most fervent objection to the parking lot project is on account of the impact to the community feel. As I had mentioned above, the sole reason we bought our home was for the lot and the views it provides. My husband and I have been fortunate and have been in the process of remodeling our home over the last six months. When we got the news the golf club would like to turn our backyards into a parking lot, I just about cried. The effort, time, and money we have put in to making our house a home for years to come only to find out that how we had designed our remodel – windows all facing the park (would be parking lot) – just about did me in. We have seven kids that live in our culs-de-sac and often use the backyards as their playground, and it is wonderful, and it is how it should remain. As the song goes, the clubhouse is asking to “pave paradise and put up a parking lot.” I’m sure there will be many conversations in the coming months and mine is only one voice of many. Please be aware that I do plan on writing a similar letter to Interlachen Country Club asking them to reconsider the location and layout of their proposed plan. I hope that in reading this letter, you were able to get to know a small part of me and empathize with what this plan would mean for my family and our neighbors. I ask that you consider the proposed Non- permeable Valet Parking Lot & Debris Storage that would replace our beautiful paradise and ask, is it worth it? In appreciation, Britta Sortland Ryan Respondent No:4 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 29, 2021 07:24:00 am Last Seen:May 29, 2021 07:24:00 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jay Halvorson Q2.Address 5049 Park Terrace Q3.Comment I oppose the destruction of badly needed single family homes to build a parking lot in a quiet neighborhood. This would set a couple of very bad precedents in our city. Respondent No:5 Login:AC Coleman Email:ayupaldr99@gmail.com Responded At:May 29, 2021 20:36:55 pm Last Seen:May 30, 2021 01:13:57 am IP Address:73.242.45.193 Q1.First and Last Name AC Coleman Q2.Address 6313 Waterman Ave Q3.Comment My letter is a plea to deny ICC's proposal for a "Valet Lot and Debis Storage" CUP. We've lived on Waterman Ave for 15 years. Purchasing here in Edina for the reasons everyone does, location, location. We knew that residing on Waterman put us in the Hopkins school district, a deterrent for most, open enrollment influenced the final decision. We were charmed by the neighborhood feeling and eventually has lead to very deep friendships throughout the surrounding blocks. Had I known that what we have lived through as ICC as a neighbor, we likely would not have purchased this home. After having two prominent Edina realtors recently tour and assess our home prior to our proposed renovations, we were brutally told it wasn't worth the deep investment for these reasons: 1- Traffic on Waterman Ave is too heavily incurred by commercial vehicles and increased volume of membership entering the rear entrance of ICC. 2- ICC's purchase of 4 homes closest to ICC and turning them into tenant properties. a- One single family home purposefully left to derelict so they may demolish it for a putting green/extended driving range. b- One single family home generating income for ICC is also proposed for demolition allowing for an additional 200 cars to be parked. c- One single family home leased to revolving tenants who consistently disrespect the neighbors properties. d- Directly next to my home is the "Caddy Shack" While we've had a good run of decent tenants, the red Budweiser tent hopefully won't become a permanent installation. After disclosing the perks of "going to miss my tee time/I'm late for pickle ball/drunk members who leave used condoms on my lawn" Speed frenzy everyday. We can only hope to break even with a sale of our home. The proposed "Valet Lot and Debris Storage" is only going to make this situation worse. We should be grateful that ICC has proposed a cul de sac and security gate at the end of Waterman Ave. Yet neither would increase the safety of our properties, and actually would attract more negative elements. A security gate with no fencing around the perimeter is useless. No one is going to guarantee that the commercial traffic will subside or the members ability to use the rear gate (with 200 more parking spaces/driving range/putting green/additional courts directly behind the gate) would continue to be restricted. We haven't even touched on the massive environmental destruction this "Valet Lot" will incur. The Watershed District has already rejected ICC's first proposal. There is drainage issues on both sides of Waterman Ave. The vicious impact to our neighbors woodland valley that supports a huge variety of wildlife, historical trees, children's play zones, multiple gardens and a pond will FOREVER be changed. Let's not forget the invasive lights, noise and cameras. No one believes the "We have no plans at this time" line that ICC has fed this neighborhood for years. Giving ICC this "Valet and Debris Lot" CUP will just open the door further for the building of a golf pavilion that has already been promised to the members. None of the members of ICC live on Waterman Ave. None of them have had to live with years of constant construction traffic on top of commercial and membership increased volume. It must be quite a privilege to not have to worry about a parking lot being built in their back yard. I urge any and all who are interested, concerned and appalled for our diminishing green spaces, quality middle income homes and continued privilege encroachment killing our quality of life. Please speak out, support this neighborhood and help us get the "Valet Lot and Debris Storage" proposal rejected. Enough is enough. Thank you AC Coleman Respondent No:6 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 31, 2021 15:07:54 pm Last Seen:May 31, 2021 15:07:54 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Rachel Mairose Q2.Address 14419 Westridge Dr Q3.Comment My family spends a lot of time in the yards abutting Interlachen (my parents own on a house on Maloney). They bought this land and built a house because of the view. Wildlife. Woods. Birds. Serenity. Quiet. And now Interlachen wants to put a parking lot and flood lights in the space right next to their backyard. They are distraught. We are, too. Interlachen needs a variance to be able to do this, and we are urging you not to allow it. The whole neighborhood is up in arms about how their serene neighborhood - one they spent a pretty penny to live in - could be forever changed. Please consider not allowing this variance. Allow the community to have some say. They bought these homes because there would never be buildings, etc. allowed. Why are there rules if the powerful can simply change them? Thank you for hearing us out. Respondent No:7 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 31, 2021 18:11:13 pm Last Seen:May 31, 2021 18:11:13 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lorraine LaRoy Q2.Address 2701 Crescent Ridge Rd Q3.Comment I oppose Interlachen Country Club's plan to build a parking lot in a residential neighborhood. This requires tearing down homes and destroying green space and cutting down large trees and will negatively affect the residents of an otherwise quiet neighborhood year round for the benefit of a few country club members and or employees for a few months per year. Respondent No:8 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 01, 2021 05:51:23 am Last Seen:Jun 01, 2021 05:51:23 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Patricia Hyland Hawver Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment This expansion of Interlachen Country Club into the residential property areas boundaried by John Street on northside and Waterman Avenue on the southside - will create many forms of pollution and destroy the character and quality of the residential neighborhoods which share these spaces. It will cause noise pollution as Waterman Avenue will become conduit for the large delivery trucks to the site, and diesel trucks will be backed up in cue waiting for the Interlachen access gate to be opened, this street is already in disrepair and the volume of heavy traffic will further exacerbate this issue. The parking lot itself will also add noise issues with the contiguous property owners. The families residing on Waterman with children are now at greater risk for traffic dangers. Crime reports filed with the city of Edina by Interlachen Country Club have all listed Waterman as the access point for non-member intruders into Interlachen parking lots. The proposed drainage system that Interlachen is planning to install from Waterman across this property will be deposited into a drainage basin/pond that borders several residential lots that border sensitive native bog areas. There has been no information on what testing (air and soil), if any, Interlachen plans on during peak seasons of flowage, the overflows will sit in this area - emitting vapors and become areas of mosquito breeding. The light pollution of high parking lot lighting will become issues with neighbors, just like the lighting now being utilized for the hockey rinks. The quality of life and the character of the neighboring communities will be irreparably harmed if this expansion is allowed. Respondent No:9 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 01, 2021 16:24:05 pm Last Seen:Jun 01, 2021 16:24:05 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Daniel From Q2.Address 508 John St Q3.Comment I live in the neighborhood immediate to the Club (John St.) and I appreciate the location and park like feel we have with our linked mature growth backyards in our neighborhood. I appreciate the mature trees and growth around the perimeter of the Club as it shields the neighborhood from their current noise and light pollution. This seems to also fit the needs of all the wildlife too as we enjoy seeing even large animals like deer often. I am commenting because this proposal isn’t thoughtful of the wider picture of the neighborhood and the goals of the City. It exacerbates the ongoing housing crisis by further reducing residential land and built home supply. It places a parking lot within a residential area disrupting deer trails, removes mature trees and vegetation, while also increasing noise and light pollution within a neighborhood. The city has already approved construction along Blake (our families thank you!) to improve safety of all pedestrians on a similar timeline to the Club's proposal. Additionally, for safety and security of the Club's employees and members they could've installed a gate at any time using the land they currently occupy within a neighborhood and for those who do choose to park at the church, the Club could be providing shuttle services. I think the Club can continue to be successful and good stewards of the 170 acres they currently occupy. Respondent No:10 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 01, 2021 18:15:14 pm Last Seen:Jun 01, 2021 18:15:14 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Susan Law Q2.Address 4790 Northern Road Mound Q3.Comment We lived in that neighborhood on Harrison Ave for a long time. I have never seen the Interlachen parking lot overfull. It's otherwise a completely residential neighborhood with limited green space. Last thing needed is a big stretch of asphalt. Parking lots are basically unattractive no matter what you do. Respondent No:11 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 10:28:27 am Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 10:28:27 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name James LaRoy Q2.Address 2701 Crescent Ridge Rd Q3.Comment I feel Interlachen Country Club’s plan to put a parking lot in a residential neighborhood and remove homes to do so is a terrible idea. Our neighborhood does not need more parking lots with lights and noise to interfere with our serenity which we worked hard to create by modifying and building homes in this great area.The Country club is being a terrible neighbor by promoting this idea. Respondent No:12 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 20:09:38 pm Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 20:09:38 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lisa White Q2.Address 971 Nine Mile Cove Q3.Comment I believe the parcel that Interlachen is planning to use for parking is already vacant and being used for that purpose. The country club is going to pave it and light it so it is safe. They are not bulldozing homes. The plan is to put a gate in on Waterman Road that will be used for delivery’s not member traffic. The plan has been thoughtfully done to consider the neighborhood. Respondent No:13 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 20:25:45 pm Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 20:25:45 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Keith Curtin Q2.Address 5525 Code Ave Q3.Comment I am 100% in support of the country club expansion. The Interlachen Country Club is a wonderful asset to Edina and an asset we should support. Interlachen is an attraction for guests to the city for golf course events, the expansion will provide additional storm water runoff filtration, and the Interlachen Country Club parking situation is in desperate need of being expanded. Respondent No:14 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 21:07:00 pm Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 21:07:00 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Christine Lamson Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment I’m a 3 year resident of this wonderful neighborhood of great neighbors, some who’ve lived here for 40+ years, or recently moved from other parts of the city, because of the natural beauty of our street. John street , and the park like settings we are blessed to have purchased on John street..and to watch the varieties of wildlife that live with us here, the open air space, open skies, the long views, our wonderful yards, cannot be and should not be taken up and covered in asphalt and parking stripes, intrusive lighting, many cars, headlights, car doors slamming, engines running, polluting, there has to be other options... for the privledged members of this private Country Club. Out of curiosity, how Many of our City Council members our City Planning members, have memberships or their family members have memberships to ICC? Please take a poll and share the results with the citizens who call this neighborhood home.. My home directly butts up to this ludicrous planned parking lot / debris storage area, and who knows what future plans for this space that may lie down the road.. A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD! This is a ludicrous plan, to serve a private member golf course, and a takeover of peoples home and yards, who call these neighborhoods their places of happiness, places of security.. not what you receive living with a parking lot and buildings, built remote within and central to our backyards with extreme intrusive lighting, noise and pollution crime,chemical runoff from hard surfaces into the watershed.. let alone the destruction of habitats for birds and animals share this space and who live among us. The brazen actions that ICC is ATTEMPTING (?), and seems pretty confident in their actions, is an assault to our neighborhood and the loving people who chose to put down roots here. Speaking of roots, ICC’s plans to destroy affordable housing and irreplaceable century old species of tree’s... tell me , what would you do if this were happening in your Edina neighborhood? Would you tell your children to “ go play in the parking lot?” Or would you rather they play in a park like setting on beautiful green grass, with rare century trees, and wildlife? Chrissy Lamson Respondent No:15 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 21:14:53 pm Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 21:14:53 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Doug Haining Q2.Address 6433 Maloney Ave Q3.Comment I have a number of concerns with this project. 1. The club bought up several homes on Waterman avenue, and then allowed them to deteriorate into more or less uninhabitable structures. Then they tell the neighbors that they're doing them a favor by razing them. That's a pretty crummy modus operandi. 2. The club will be removing homes that could be rented out or sold to families. 3. The club will be removing mature trees to complete the project. There should be a way to do a project without deforestation, especially of mature trees. It shouldn't need to be said that 100+ year old trees should remain standing. 4. There is already a gravel-surface parking lot in the area where the proposed parking lot would go. The plan is to enlarge the lot and pave it. There are alternatives to bituminous pavement that allow water to filter through the surface, thereby greatly reducing runoff and controlling erosion. The "buffer area" is a nice idea but might be unnecessary if pavement alternatives are used. The MN Landscape Arboretum has these kinds of alternatives in use, and is a good resource to learn more about it. It seems quite short-sighted that the architects did not include these kinds of alternatives in the plan. ("Too expensive" is not a valid reason for an entity like Interlachen CC.) If the plan should be approved, it would be my hope that it would be revised to include such paving alternatives. 5. The neighbors in the immediate vicinity do not want the project to proceed. For these reasons I am against the project and recommend the Edina City Council disallow its approval. Respondent No:16 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 23:08:59 pm Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 23:08:59 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Alissa Movern Q2.Address 5005 west 56th street Q3.Comment I am not a resident in this area, however it is unfair to rezone private family homes to then allow for a parking lot with increased traffic through a neighborhood. Also I question the need for more asphalt. Hopefully the plan is for something that is environmentally friendly. For a city that is trying to increase biking and alternative forms of transportation making more parking lots I don’t think is inline with current city initiatives. Respondent No:17 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 05:23:08 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 05:23:08 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Briana Rhodes Q2.Address 4925 Green Farms Circle Q3.Comment Seems a project like this does little to improve the ecosystem of this neighborhood. What the ICC project will do is greatly effect the quality of life for surrounding families; nature will be negatively impacted, the roads will be negatively impacted, and noise will be amplified. For what? I’m not saying that all construction projects are bad and we should not approve anything negatively affecting our environment; however, many parts of this project seem unnecessary and wasteful. Talking to my neighbors it is clear that the only ones ‘for’ this project are ICC members. They’d like to tell me that bulldozing houses, demolishing mature trees and decimating green space to make way for VIP parking, a putting green and new tee off space is not only necessary but validated by their dues. They deserve to do this, they “pay” to make these changes, who cares about “those homes” or “those people” in “that” area. Like they are doing everyone a favor. It makes me cringe. How many members does ICC have? Do they require twice the space to park VIP cars and golf carts? This project is superfluous and presumptuous; it is clear ICC already believes they have a green light. Myself? I would choose to not let this project pass for the above reasons and because I’d choose nature over some pompous, entitled ICC member’s ability to park their Ferrari any day. Respondent No:18 Login:elainecor53 Email:elainecor53@gmail.com Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 05:54:15 am Last Seen:May 22, 2021 21:38:12 pm IP Address:68.54.97.75 Q1.First and Last Name Elaine R Corcoran Q2.Address 7100 Metro Blvd . #423 Q3.Comment There is no need for this excess in today's world. To bull doze housing for a parking lot is absurd. Please do not vote for this project. Respondent No:19 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 06:16:28 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 06:16:28 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Charlotte Lefebvre Q2.Address 6412 Aspen Rd Q3.Comment No. No no no no. Please do not approve of this proposal. Respondent No:20 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 07:12:41 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 07:12:41 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Rebecca Nye Q2.Address 6313 Peacedale Av S Edina MN Q3.Comment Your lack of concern for Edina residents who actually live here currently is appalling. Now with the expansion of the parking lot at Interlachen, it just amplifies your disregard of us and seeming worship of those who don’t live here or don’t live here yet. My young adult relatives are choosing to move to adjoining suburbs where they actually care about current citizens. Respondent No:21 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 07:16:51 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 07:16:51 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Karen Huffman Q2.Address 4724 Dunberry Lane Q3.Comment Just. No. Respondent No:22 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 07:39:24 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 07:39:24 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Roger Fitzgerald Q2.Address 416 Blake Rd S, Edina Q3.Comment I suggest that the club look at building either a 2-3 level parking garage on their existing grounds or an underground garage, using the top level for practice greens, garden, courts, etc. We want to keep our neighborhood homes. Respondent No:23 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 07:46:24 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 07:46:24 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mary Boespflug Q2.Address 8918 Newton Avenue S Q3.Comment PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE do not allow this to move forward.......the wealthy have got to stop discounting the needs of those who have nothing. What happened to care of one another? especially those less fortunate. Allowing this to happen enables the separation of communities and the enabling of those who have to take from those who have not. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE hear the voices of the many who care. Respondent No:24 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 07:56:02 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 07:56:02 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Leffert Tigelaar Q2.Address 5816 Stuart Ave, 55436 Q3.Comment Is the public right away vacated in the area of the proposed cul de sac? The property boundary line suggests that is has been? Respondent No:25 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 09:03:32 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 09:03:32 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Suzanne Cluckey Q2.Address 7012 Bristol Blvd Q3.Comment They can't expand their current parking vertically and put a putting green on top? They have money to buy up houses at a premium (and turn them into eyesores and hazards) but cannot afford a more environmentally friendly solution to their parking needs? This lazy-minded, cheaply executed plan creates no value for the neighboring community, generates ill will from the country club's neighbors and, most critically, adds to environmental stress in an increasingly hard-scaped suburb with more pavement and chemically treated turf. This is the kind "we're entitled" project that makes ordinary people despise country clubs. Interlachen can and should do much better. Respondent No:26 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 09:49:56 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 09:49:56 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Emily Knight Q2.Address 6085 Lincoln Drive Q3.Comment Affordable housing is a critical need in this community. Luxury parking is not. Respondent No:27 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 10:18:57 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 10:18:57 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Todd Chambliss Q2.Address 5524 Malibu Drive Q3.Comment I think this is a great idea. This takes care of blighted property and add usable green space along with a garden and trees. This will also help with ease of access to employees and members for the clubhouse, courts and rinks as well. Respondent No:28 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 10:24:27 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 10:24:27 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Elizabeth Mayotte Q2.Address 265 Oakwood Road Hopkins MN 55343 Q3.Comment Interested in seeing how this will work out for the neighborhoods. I was a former member, so can look at it from both sides. Respondent No:29 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 10:27:11 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 10:27:11 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mary Jo Sanderson Q2.Address 6519 Interlachen Blvd, edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment I am very supportive of the plan and respect how much Interlachen has done to improve the look of the neighborhood while being respectful of surrounding homes and preserving/replacing trees and vegetation disrupted by any additions. It looks lovely. Respondent No:30 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 11:03:07 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 11:03:07 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Karen Seay Q2.Address 6808 Dovre Drive, Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment My reaction to the proposal by ICC is that it seems to fly in the face of any intention or desire by the City of Edina and Edina residents to preserve and protect affordable homes. Whether ICC already owns the homes and the property or not, this is a waste of resources and negatively affects the surrounding neighbors, who appear to be totally in opposition to the plan, not to mention the value of their properties and their everyday comfort in their homes. The proposal also appears to fly in the face of current reasonable environmental practice to create hard-surface parking lots where open and drainable land currently exists. The world is moving toward de-emphasizing use of existing remaining open urban and suburban land for the support and propagation of private automobiles, their use, and storage. This plan is moving in the opposite direction. My final point is that this plan almost laughably plays into the hands of ancient and, I truly hope, outmoded stereotypes about Edina, who lives here, who holds power and uses it to the detriment of anyone who isn’t a “privileged,” wealthy Edinan. This will be the source of jokes for years if and when this proposal is approved and ICC continues with its apparently already-undertaken expansion plans. I hate seeing our city and its people subjected to scorn and ridicule because of the expansion desires of a country club. I am frankly shocked that this proposal exists and embarrassed for the city that it does. Respondent No:31 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 13:02:21 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 13:02:21 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Blair Okey Q2.Address 5122 Richmond Drive Q3.Comment This is ridiculous. I oppose this actio Respondent No:32 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 13:46:18 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 13:46:18 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Patricia Hyland Hawver Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment This project will destroy an established neighborhood of young families, long-time residents, and a forest of old trees, as well as some affordable housing units. Surely, EDINA must have a responsibility to steward its land, neighborhoods, forests and neighborhoods. Respondent No:33 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 13:58:59 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 13:58:59 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mary McNamara Q2.Address 6221 Maloney Ave. Edina, MN 55343 Q3.Comment The plan is an intrusion into a settled, quiet residential neighborhood. It adversely affects homes, due to parking lot noise and lighting and the storm water plan directs the runoff into the backyards of homes on Maloney Ave. before it empties into the part of a pond which is located on my property. Respondent No:34 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 14:45:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 14:45:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Renata Farrell Q2.Address 5709 Hyland Ct. Dr., Bloomington Q3.Comment I have such fond memories of my granddaughter's large, elaborate wedding at Interlachen and the times I have been at other gatherings there. However, I am deeply saddened to think Interlachen would try to expand at the expense of people who need the housing that would be leveled. Respondent No:35 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 15:43:44 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 15:43:44 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Sally A. Goff Q2.Address 31051 Wrencrest Drive, Wesley Chapel, FL 33553 Q3.Comment I know residents of this area & cannot believe that you would consider demolishing beautiful homes, trees, & land to ‘put in a parking lot’. Shame on you for such bully-like, greedy behavior. Must be a great deal of wealthy folks on the ‘board’ who are VP’s in the insurance field! That’s what seems to be running our country. These people have worked hard to get what they have. Unreal, you should attempt to take this land from them! Respondent No:36 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 19:48:58 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 19:48:58 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joy Miller-Damiani Q2.Address 502 Normandy Village, Nanuet NY 10954 Q3.Comment Please keep this beautiful neighborhood the way it is! Respondent No:37 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 04, 2021 02:13:59 am Last Seen:Jun 04, 2021 02:13:59 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kandy Duncan Q2.Address 11915 Jackson Road Q3.Comment How dare you! You are disgusting for wanting to destroy the homes on the street my Cousin lives! It's such a quiet beautiful little neighborhood. Build the parking lot where it would not cause destruction of people's lives! There is way too much of that going on today. Please have a heart!!! Respondent No:38 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 08, 2021 10:57:26 am Last Seen:Jun 08, 2021 10:57:26 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name ronald nelson Q2.Address 421 john st Q3.Comment I am pro to allow Interlachen CC to proceed with their proposal. Respondent No:39 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 08, 2021 11:12:34 am Last Seen:Jun 08, 2021 11:12:34 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Patricia Nelson Q2.Address 421 John St Q3.Comment I feel Interlachen's proposal would not cause any harm to the area and they should be allowed to proceed with their conditional use request. It will add to the quality of the area and I generally feel people should be allowed to do what they choose with their property. Respondent No:40 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 08, 2021 13:31:43 pm Last Seen:Jun 08, 2021 13:31:43 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mark Halvorson Q2.Address 416 Kresse Circle Q3.Comment Really? Is this what Edina needs, another impervious parking lot? In a watershed district? Isn’t Edina trying to promote single family home ownership? Does it make sense to remove affordable housing so the golf course can create a putting green and overflow parking? Just wondering? Respondent No:41 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 10, 2021 08:15:33 am Last Seen:Jun 10, 2021 08:15:33 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name David Brockway Q2.Address 6301 Maloney Avenue Q3.Comment I am opposed to Interlachen's plan to build a parking lot just to the south, and adjacent to our property. I hope the City of Edina does not grant a conditional use permit. Background: We bought this property 9 years ago for our retirement home because of the back yard, and surrounding properties. It was all green space, with abundant naturalized plantings, and all residences' backyards converging to create a parkland setting we all enjoyed. There was abundant wildlife, and this seemed an oasis for the Waterman and Maloney residents bordering it. I am an amateur ecologist, and this was an ideal situation. At the time we bought the property and build our house, Interlachen Club owned an adjacent lot with a house, but did not seem to use it. The adjacent neighbor told us that the club was not maintaining the house AKA "The Rat House". At that time it was zoned residential, and was not a concern of ours. Interlachen's activities could be heard, primarily from tennis courts and swimming pool area, but were usually not intrusive. #1 issue was the lights from their parking lot or tennis courts being left on at night. These are tall, high intensity lights, and shone directly into our bedroom, disrupting our sleep. Normally, in nighttime our backyard is completely dark. Interlachen's plan replaces two large backyards with a 100+ space parking lot that is in our direct line of sight as we sit in our living room and bedroom, esp in the winter when the leaves are down. They have unspecified lighting plans that may have lights shining in our windows at any time of day. This could seriously and permanently disrupt our, and our neighbors sleep, let alone our overall enjoyment of our home. Light pollution is also disruptive to wildlife. At the same time, a dark isolated parking lot seems risky. Lights controlled by motion detectors would be particularly disruptive. It also will increase the noise from Interlachen. Car doors slamming and people talking/yelling in the normal course of things, or special events. Visually, watching cars going in and out of a parking lot is unattractive. This is not on the edge of a busy road, this is in the middle of great Edina neighborhood. Runoff would be increased to the local pond, which is already overburdened with nutrients. I don't think the bioretention basin is adequate to handle runoff from both the parking lot and Waterman Ave. Increased nutrient burden to the wetland increases the risk of obnoxious/toxic algae growth. The parking lot will increase air temperature for the nearby homes. Perhaps they can build a 2 level lot on the current lots. Edina needs no more parking lots. I understand why Interlachen wants to do this. It would enhance their facility. But we and our neighbors would be paying the price. They are asking for a CUP to add value to their golf club(that most of us could not afford a membership to), by taking value away from our homes and neighborhood. They propose mitigation strategies, but the devil is in the details, right? If they can buy a house and then neglect it, why wouldn't they promise whatever to get the CUP, then do whatever they want? Please do not grant Interlachen CC a conditional use permit to put a parking lot in the midst of our neighborhood. Thank you! Respondent No:42 Login:Linda Thomas Email:lthomasmovies@yahoo.com Responded At:Jun 12, 2021 11:11:14 am Last Seen:Jun 11, 2021 16:47:53 pm IP Address:75.73.69.122 Q1.First and Last Name Linda Thomas Q2.Address 505 John St Q3.Comment Interlachen Country Club has been creating a parking problem for itself for years. My husband and I were members at ICC for 26 years. They have increased the membership several times, especially by creating new classifications of members. 827 families is a huge number. They made that number, not us. They have added activities like hockey, pickle ball, cornhole, paddle tennis and a large exercise area. Most of those activities are on the west end of the property, where the new parking would be. The new lot would park 105 cars and be around 30,000 square feet of asphalt. Who in Edina or anywhere else would want a 105 space parking lot within 80 feet of their yard? At least 15 to 30 mature trees (20 to 40 ft) would have to be cut down. We have enjoyed the beauty of al the trees, wildlife and especially the birds for 45 years. All of that has gotten better than ever because several of our neighbors have landscaped their yards to draw more of the wildlife to the area and they have succeeded fantastically. Since I retired when the pandemic came, I have spent virtually 1-2 hours every nice morning on deck in peace and tranquility with all of nature's sounds while enjoying my coffee and breakfast on the deck. I do some reading, writing, texting and just relaxing. It's a perfect spot to start and end your day. We use our deck as our cabin in summer. We are out on it every possible day and night cooking, grilling, entertaining, eating, reading, or just relaxing for hours on end. Also, our family room looks out to the east. We are in that room all the time in colder weather. We already suffer from light and noise pollution from Interlachen year round. Bringing it at least 150 feet closer will only make it worse. We have never complained about the noise from all the various activities but losing the peace, the view and tranquility on our deck and from the back of our house would be a huge loss for us and our neighbors. The ICC General Manager, who's only been there for 4 1/2 years, mentioned the safety of their employees early in the meeting. In 45 years, I don't recall hearing about an accident occurring on Blake Road involving any ICC employee. I have not heard about people being worried about that before. They took out parking when they enlarged the pool area, added the large steps down from the pro shop, enlarged the tennis court area and made the parking horizontal instead of vertical and put in landscaped concrete dividers. They, also, made a landscaped walkway from the east side to the tennis court area. Joel Livingood, Interlachen's General Manager, told the membership that no parking places were lost when they redid and landscaped the main parking lot but I can say that is simply not true. Our entire neighborhood is upset about this proposed development. I feel like we are being bullied by the bigger and more powerful to do what they want. Interlachen has purchased 6 R-1 lots with affordable houses on them (3 have already been torn down) in a residential neighborhood to put in a 30,000 sq foot 105 space commercial parking lot. I did not know they had done that until just before our first meeting at ICC. Please do the right thing and deny them their proposed conditional use permit. I suggest that anyone involved in deciding the conditional use permit, please read Edina's Code of Ordinances Sec. 36-1 Findings Sec 36-2 Objectives subsection 1, 3, 5, 9. It should be easy to see this proposal goes against all of those. Respectfully, Linda Thomas Respondent No:43 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 12, 2021 17:24:11 pm Last Seen:Jun 12, 2021 17:24:11 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Adam Engebretson Q2.Address 235 Holly Rd, Hopkins Q3.Comment I support Interlachen County Club's proposal to expand the boundaries of their club, including adding parking and practice facilities. ICC has been in their current location for more than 100 years and have limited options to expand. This is a common sense solution that allows ICC to grow but is balanced with the needs of the surrounding neighborhood. Respondent No:44 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 13, 2021 17:19:20 pm Last Seen:Jun 13, 2021 17:19:20 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Cathie Hayward Q2.Address 7013 Edenvale Blvd., Eden Prairie, MN 55346 Q3.Comment On behalf of my my friends who live in this neighborhood, I am aghast at the plans to destroy middle class homes and values to put in a parking lot for a Country Club! I certainly hope this will be reconsidered and rescinded. Respondent No:45 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 13, 2021 17:44:05 pm Last Seen:Jun 13, 2021 17:44:05 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Alissa Qaranivalu Q2.Address 209 W Market street Panora Ia 50216 Q3.Comment Concerned about the impact a parking lot and rezoning would have on this neighborhood. We have friends who live there and absolutly appreciate the nature and quietness. I would imagine homeowners would also be concerned about taking away their quiet street and losing valuable housing. Please consider the best interest of this neighborhood by voting against a rezone. Respondent No:46 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 13, 2021 20:02:25 pm Last Seen:Jun 13, 2021 20:02:25 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Deb Bonner Q2.Address 923 NW 110th Q3.Comment Please do not ruin a beautiful neighborhood, tearing down houses and killing beautiful trees to build a parking lot. I don’t see how you can completely uproot people. Respondent No:47 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 14, 2021 19:57:43 pm Last Seen:Jun 14, 2021 19:57:43 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Caryl Morgan Q2.Address 5808 South Dr Q3.Comment Interlachen has always gone above and beyond to be respectful neighbors. It looks like this is a very reasonable request and will be nicely done. I approve. Respondent No:48 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 08:29:01 am Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 08:29:01 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Chrissy Hyland Lamson Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment To Whom it many concern in Edina city Council and planning and Development of Edina Building a parking lot along with any type of storage unit for what future purposes we don’t know, whether it be disclosed or not, or will be in the future is an absolute insult, absolutely selfish project and would be a travesty to our beautiful neighborhoods on John Street and Waterman Avenue. Our residents, our people, and our wildlife, including many types of birds, who nest and migrate through our watershed location, here on John, Waterman, and Maloney St. Our neighborhood is created from good families, good people, who’ve moved here from other places because of this magical park like setting, which is rare to find in Edina or any other cities or suburbs. The families who have children feel safe that their kids have a safe place to play, believe me having a parking lot in their backyard is not to be considered safe by any shape of form! The impact to the families and the environment is truly unacceptable! ICC, go find another location on your 170 acres if you feel you need more parking and a storage facility that may store “who knows what,” unsitely items that you don’t want your members to see, but it’s okay to place them in our neighbors view..for the elite members of your private club. When I talk about “Views”, we don’t consider the view of an elevated parking lot with obtrusive security lighting, chain link fences, raised headlights from cars, large SUV’s, golf carts, trucks , flashing into our windows and our backyards. Would you and your families consider this acceptable in your backyard, let alone in the middle of their neighborhoods? I’m also curious as to the number of City government members, who may belong to ICC or their family members who belong to ICC. If that can be disclosed publicly to our neighborhood? Don’t take away our neighborhood with your parking lot ! Chrissy Hyland Lamson John Street Respondent No:49 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:20:02 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:20:02 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Casey Schoen Q2.Address 6228 Parkwood Rd, Edina Q3.Comment I am a long time Edina resident and member at ICC. I think the plan proposed by ICC has been very thoughtful and results in an overall safer environment for ICC members and their children, for ICC staff and for our neighbors located on Waterman Avenue (through the installation of at gate restricting traffic flow on Waterman). I think ICC has been a good member of the community going to extensive efforts to listen to concerns through a variety of forums and address them in the best possible way. Respondent No:50 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:20:50 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:20:50 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joanna Roth Q2.Address 5207 Doncaster way edina Q3.Comment I am very supportive of this expansion to help ease traffic on waterman. Important to ensure adequate trees are kept but believe this will help elevate the street and keep parking at the club Respondent No:51 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:21:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:21:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Brian Roth Q2.Address 5207 Doncaster Way Q3.Comment I am in 100% full support for this project. It is needed from a parking POV and Interlachen has been good neighbors and a big draw to Edina in general. Respondent No:52 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:21:45 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:21:45 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Apoorva Shah Q2.Address 5924 Interlachen boulevard Q3.Comment We support this project. It will be great for the community. Respondent No:53 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:23:21 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:23:21 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mike DeVoe Q2.Address 5900 Long Brake Trail, Edina Q3.Comment This is a well thought out plan incorporating neighbors' input. It will help fill a need for club members, as well as enhance safety for the neighborhood, club employees and, perhaps most importantly, children in the club parking lot. Respondent No:54 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:24:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:24:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Daniel Cragg Q2.Address 4917 Arden Ave Q3.Comment I completely support Interlachen's application. The opposition to this improvement is yet another example of NIMBYism run amok. Interlachen went above and beyond to address neighborhood concerns by purchasing two properties to act as a buffer and in the aesthetic design. Given all the concessions that Interlachen has made to neighborhood concerns, it would be hard to see a denial of this application as anything but arbitrary and capricious. Respondent No:55 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:24:35 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:24:35 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Octavio Portu Q2.Address 4705 Annaway Drive, Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment I support the permit for Interlachen Country Club to expand the boundaries of the country club and add a new parking lot and expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. The project will add traffic safety to the Waterman Avenue area, as well as provide much needed parking to eliminate parking congestions in adjacent streets. Respondent No:56 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Todd Doroff Q2.Address 6304 Brookview Ave Edina, MN 55424 Q3.Comment I encourage support for Interlachen's Conditional Use Permit application. The proposal will accomplish the goals of improving safety for neighbors as well as increasing parking for members, guests and employees. Interlachen has provided a number of opportunities for input and to share information with impacted neighbors. The designed plan considered concerns from neighbors, was thoughtfully planned out and improves the aesthetics and functionality of the area. It is a win- win for all parties. Respondent No:57 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:15 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:15 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Emily Doherty Q2.Address 5004 Skyline Dr Q3.Comment During the summer months, we routinely have to arrive early to swim lessons, golf, etc., so that we can find a parking spot and not worry about schlepping our stuff and young kids a long distance or deal with valeting. I worry about the caddies and employees that have to park at the the church--Interlachen Blvd and Blake Rd are very busy and I often see distracted drivers looking at their phones and driving over the speed limit. The staff have to walk a half a mile to get to work, with part of that stretch on Blake Rd. My experience at ICC is that the leadership team is incredibly thoughtful in their style -- always trying to find ways to make things better, safer, and more efficient, and they always keep our neighbors in mind when making decisions. Respondent No:58 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:57 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:57 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Laura Heinmiller Q2.Address 5300 Dundee rd Edina,MN Q3.Comment We are fully supportive of the parking/expansion plan being proposed by Interlachen Country Club. We feel it would create a safer environment for both the club and the surrounding neighborhood while having minimal impact on the surrounding neighborhood. We enthusiastically endorse this plan!!! Respondent No:59 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:27:19 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:27:19 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Becca Stockdale Q2.Address 6208 Coteau Trl. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Q3.Comment I wanted to comment on my support for the project Interlachen Country Club proposes. The club needs more parking to support membership and also to make it more safe for staff so they don't have to cross a busy road when forced to use overflow parking. Interlachen is a good neighbor. They have listened to the surrounding neighbors and have tried to find the best compromise for both parties. Respondent No:60 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:27:44 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:27:44 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ryan Spanheimer Q2.Address 5908 Kellogg Ave Edina MN 55424 Q3.Comment I'm writing to submit my strong approval for Interlachen's CUP. The proposed plan takes into consideration all of the surrounding properties and goes out of its way to accommodate these neighboring properties to the cost of Interlachen. The additional parking is necessary to the continues success of Interlachen and the plan as proposed facilitates increased safety for the neighboring properties by diverting traffic in a safe and efficient manner. I cannot imagine a more thorough and considerate plan than that proposed by Interlachen. Concerns raised by neighboring properties are based on misinformation and not fact. This should be considered an easy CUP approval. Respondent No:61 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:33:24 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:33:24 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lindsay and Wally Cisewski Q2.Address 4924 Ridge Road, Edina 55436 Q3.Comment We support the Interlachen expansion of the parking area on Waterman. We live a few streets over, and are very familiar with this area. There is a need for additional parking, and a current shortage at Interlachen. The project will improve safety for the employees who currently have to cross the very busy Blake Road from the current overflow parking situation across the street. Interlachen is a good neighbor, and has listened to residents concerns, proposed a beautiful aesthetically pleasing project, and purchased buffer areas as well. Respondent No:62 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:34:31 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:34:31 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joe Carroll Q2.Address 5932 Tamarac Ave, Edina Q3.Comment Hi, as both a resident of Edina and a member of Interlachen, I wanted to share how helpful this expansion will be. In the summer, parking at Interlachen is always very tight / at capacity and I think the new proposed parking lot would help nearby residents by streamlining traffic and ensuring more safety for the surrounding neighborhood by focusing all traffic through the main entrance on Interlachen Blvd. Additionally, knowing how thoughtful the Interlachen team is, I'm sure they have considered each of the neighbors concerns and found creative ways to address them, as I have seen them do each and every day. As a resident of the city, I know change can be challenging, but I think we also need to recognize the value that Interlachen brings to the city of Edina, and how it helps keep our city one of the most desired in the Twin Cities area. Thank you for your consideration Respondent No:63 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:36:07 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:36:07 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kate Winninger-Smith Q2.Address 5224 W 51st Street Edina, 55436 Q3.Comment I am sharing my comments, not only as a member but also as a proud Edina resident who believes these changes will create a more beautiful as well as a very efficient improvement to the area. ICC needs more parking. - Right now the lot is over flowing and would result in parking on Interlachen Blvd. which would be an eyesore for residents and non-members. - Employees are put in precarious positions to repeatedly cross blake road. Why put them in this position is ICC is prepared to take on the cost and their land to create a safe parking area for employees? Just Saturday I was driving south on Blake road, on my way back from Target Knollwood and the car in front of me failed to see the young caddie crossing the street - it was very scary to watch and the car had to quickly veer out of the way to ensure not hitting the teen. - The plan is beautiful and would absolutely increase land value for neighbors. Right now there is nothing slowing the flow of traffic, which the fences will do and will make the neighborhood a safer place. Having the fences in place and the new plan will also lessen the foot traffic as it will become a less easily accessible entry way for members vs the absolutely open street entry way that is currently there. This proposed plan is a win-win for the community and surrounding home owners. Thank you Respondent No:64 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:37:48 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:37:48 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Sara McLenighan Q2.Address 5513 Highland Road Edina 55436 Q3.Comment Definitely support this. It is much needed and will be far safer for all! Yes we support the parking lot expansion for Interlachen Country Club. Respondent No:65 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:38:38 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:38:38 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Rick Reuter Q2.Address Elmwood Place Q3.Comment I am in support of this new plan. It's thoughtful and will bring value to the club but also the adjacent neighborhood. Respondent No:66 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:38:45 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:38:45 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name James Gain Q2.Address 5905 Wooddale Ave Q3.Comment This is a well known and premier golf course in the United States and around the world. Making these changes is not only good for Edina, but great for the future of professional golf in Minnesota! Let’s make it happen! Respondent No:67 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:39:58 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:39:58 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Charles Geer Q2.Address 5812 Northwood Dr, Edina (over 50 years an Edina resident) Q3.Comment From the standpoint of those homeowners living on Waterman Ave I would think that the project provides considerable benefit and no detriment: much decreased traffic, greatly improved groundwater control, upgraded plantings and shielding from Interlachen properties. Respondent No:68 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:41:08 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:41:08 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name William Doherty Q2.Address 5004 Skyline Drive, Edina, MN Q3.Comment Please let my comments serve as support for the conditional use permit for Interlachen Country Club. The club needs additional parking to support its members, is looking to improve safety (and reduce traffic on Waterman Ave), and looks to continue to be a wonderful part of our community and neighborhood. Respondent No:69 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:46:44 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:46:44 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Cody Skarning Q2.Address 6124 Virginia ave s Edina, my 55424 Q3.Comment Good afternoon. I am writing in support of the proposed plans to address space limitations at Interlachen Country Club. The steps that the Interlachen team has taken to acknowledge the neighbors concerns while also looking to address significant space limitations on the existing property, are significant. They have solicited, through a number of forums, feedback from the community to help identify these potential concerns. Based on feedback, they purchased additional land to provide a buffer from those who may be affected by the change. Ultimately, the updates will reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and the need for overflow parking that currently occur across Blake Road. This alone helps address current safety concerns. I hope the city of Edina understands the efforts that were taken to address the concerns presented and allows the proposed plan to move forward. Thank you for your consideration. Respondent No:70 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:52:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:52:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tim Smith Q2.Address 4521 Claremore Court Q3.Comment 1. We need additional parking; we are consistently short parking spots 2. We want to improve safety 3. ICC has been very collaborative with the surrounding neighbors Respondent No:71 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:52:06 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:52:06 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jon/Linda Radabaugh Q2.Address 5100 France Ave S Q3.Comment This parking area will be well designed, well landscaped and make the Waterman area safer and have less traffic. Respondent No:72 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:56:26 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:56:26 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joe McCusker Q2.Address 5995 Lincoln Dr, Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment Please approve the request for additional parking space and the enhancements Interlachen is proposing. The club is trying to accommodate the growth in popularity of the club to Edina residents and now needs more space. The design is thoughtful and tries to add safety as well as meet the needs of the neighbors of the club. Respondent No:73 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:58:07 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:58:07 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Rob Cain Q2.Address 4617 Golf Terrace, Edina Q3.Comment I am strongly supportive of the planned and very necessary improvements. The primary factors for my support include the safety of my children moving across the ICC campus with regular cut through traffic, the safety of our ICC staff and team members through improved and lighted parking and walkways, and the beautification and enhanced usability of the west exit. The project represents a significant enhancement to this corner of our city and our community space. Respondent No:74 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:00:39 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:00:39 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tim and Mary Kuehl Q2.Address 5708 Continental Drive Q3.Comment We live in the Parkwood Knolls area of Edina and support ICC receiving a permit to allow their project to happen. Respondent No:75 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:01:49 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:01:49 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Steve Hamm Q2.Address 5404 Larada Ln Edina 55436 Q3.Comment Interlachen has been a great neighbor. This plan will greatly reduce the traffic on Waterman St which i feel would be very important to the residents. The plan will be finished as proposed-- as Interlachen does what they say they will do. Respondent No:76 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:07:46 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:07:46 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Christina Kennedy Q2.Address 6224 Interlachen Blvd. Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment Our house backs up to the Interlachen Country's Club driving range. We consider the Club to be a very good neighbor. I support their parking proposal. I do NOT think it's safe for the Club's employees to have to cross Blake Ave. right near a dangerous curve. Respondent No:77 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:11:14 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:11:14 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name George Carroll Q2.Address ICC Q3.Comment As a former COO general manager of Interlachen this was discussed with the city engineer years ago with their input and ok This will add greatly to the safety of the neighborhood and Interlachen employees thank you again George Carroll Respondent No:78 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:27:26 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:27:26 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jane Pirtle Q2.Address 6420 Willow Wood rd Q3.Comment I support this permit. ICC does not have enough parking for it's members and guests. Respondent No:79 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:34:13 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:34:13 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ashley Anderson Q2.Address 5804 Mait Lane Edina MN 55436 Q3.Comment Voicing support to expand parking lot Respondent No:80 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:34:14 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:34:14 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name JOHN GONSIOR Q2.Address 5812 Hidden Ln Q3.Comment I am in full support of this project that will be a benefit to the neighborhood and related home values Respondent No:81 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:36:05 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:36:05 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lindsay Hill Q2.Address 5200 Kelsey Terrace Q3.Comment Interlachen Country Club has always been a good neighbor. Its past has included significant changes with clubhouse development, golf course development, and other large construction projects. The club has always been forthright and understanding of its role in the neighborhood before, during, and after these projects. The current proposal will enhance safety around the club's West entrance (particularly for residents, club employees, and children), reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue, beautify existing club property, and enhance the existing buffer areas between the club and the neighborhood. The club has taken a thoughtful approach to the enhancements to improve and minimize the club's impact on the neighborhood. As a leading private club in the country, Interlachen Country Club is an asset to Edina and a good steward of the behaviors of a good neighbor. Respondent No:82 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:48:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:48:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ryan Green Q2.Address 4904 East Sunnyslope Road Q3.Comment Thank you to the Planning Commission, ICC neighbors, and the teams that have worked tirelessly to create this plan. This comment is submitted in support of the proposed Conditional Use Permit. The current lot cannot accommodate the need for parking at the club and this will resolve that need. With that, neighborhood residents will see less traffic on Waterman as well as a refreshed asthetic and buffer separating the properties. Equally (if not more) important, employee safety will be markedly improved as there will no longer be a need for employees to park on the other side of Blake Rd only to cross the street on their way to and from the course. Thank you, to all involved, for your consideration! Regards, -Ryan Green Respondent No:83 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:57:26 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:57:26 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jason Vogt Q2.Address 6212 parkwood road Q3.Comment I support the project. Additional parking is sorely needed to improve safety. ICC has given thoughtful consideration for years and finally presented a responsible plan. Respondent No:84 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:27:13 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:27:13 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Conor Green Q2.Address 5524 Oaklawn Ave Edina Q3.Comment Hi, my family is an ICC member and 10-year Edina residents and we support this plan. I believe the club is working hard to incorporate community feedback and I honestly believe that closing off the Waterman entrance with a gate will benefit both the club and the neighborhood. ICC has seen a lot of increased activity over the past 18 months and the current parking situation is not sustainable. Many of the employees have been part of organization for years and treat the club and the neighborhood with a lot of respect. I hope they get a chance to park closer in a better, safer situation for them. Thank you Respondent No:85 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:35:36 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:35:36 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lilly Francis Q2.Address 1930 Oak Street Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Q3.Comment Throughout the summer months we are consistently short of parking spots in our current parking lots. There is increased traffic in the parking lots and on the surrounding streets due to the lack of spots. The traffic creates danger for members and employees trying to make their way to the club from a further parking location. As an employee, it is frustrating not having parking spots available as searching for an open spot usually results in my being late to clock in. Overflow parking is most definitely needed at Interlachen and the club has communicated many times with surrounding residents about their concerns. By creating extra parking safe Interlachen would be adding increased safety for their members and employees. Respondent No:86 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:45:37 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:45:37 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jigna Mahapatra Q2.Address 4200 Brookside Ave Q3.Comment The proposed project focuses on safety and I fully support safety of the neighborhood and safety of the employees to be able to park closer and not have to cross a busy street. Respondent No:87 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:45:56 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:45:56 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Erin vanSlingerlandt Q2.Address 5801 South Dr, Edina 55436 Q3.Comment As both an Edina resident and ICC member, I fully support the conditional use permit for additional parking and expanded practice area. The plan is thorough and well thought out, taking into account the concerns of those residents near the club. There is a definite need for more parking especially during the summer months. Safety is also a concern with employees now needing to cross Blake Road to use the overflow parking lot at the Lutheran church. In my years as a member, I have always known the ICC management and members to be good, respectful neighbors to those who live nearby. I do not expect their behavior to be any different under this conditional use permit. Thanks for your consideration. Respondent No:88 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:48:10 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:48:10 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Steven Scott Q2.Address 5724 Zenith Ave S. Edina, MN 55410 Q3.Comment I would like to note my full support for this project. Interlachen desperately needs additional parking. The current lack of parking creates an unsafe environment for employees who have to park off-site and walk to the club, crossing busy streets. The neighboring homes owned by the club provide an amble buffer to current residents in the area and the renderings show the aesthetics will be excellent. Respondent No:89 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:50:39 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:50:39 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jamiel Akhtar Q2.Address 5115 Halifax Ave Q3.Comment I am fully in support of the Interlachen Country Club improvements. The club has been consistently short of parking spots. ICC has been a good neighbor and I believe that the proposed plan is good the club and very fair to the neighborhood, especially considering that the club purchased the two closest properties to serve as a buffer. Respondent No:90 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:50:50 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:50:50 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Veronica Johnson Q2.Address 5841 Saint Johns Ave Q3.Comment Interlachen employs many in the community. Parking there is an issue - I believe we need to support the institutions especially when they are proposing a solution that improves the aesthetic and safety of Waterman Ave. Respondent No:91 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 15:25:13 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 15:25:13 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Michael Gorman Q2.Address 5100 Mirror Lakes Drive Q3.Comment I would like to voice my support for the proposed conditional use permit. For the sake of transparency I will note that I am a member of Interlachen. i also live nearby, and am on the related streets (interlachen blvd, waterman, etc.) on a daily basis. There are always a host of factors which need to be considered in making a decision like this. As an Edina resident, I want all of my neighbors to enjoy their property just like I want to enjoy my own. I think this project meets that standard given the design's intent to put garden/green buffers between the parking lot and the properties. Interlachen is not proposing a change to the basic nature or use of the property - all of the additions are typical country club elements. There is a parking element that is important. The overflow cars will end up somewhere else that is less desirable than having them just stay on the ICC property. From a neighborhood perspective, I would rather have people park at their destination vs. park blocks away and walk through the neighborhood. Thanks for your consideration of the project. Respondent No:92 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 15:25:53 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 15:25:53 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jerome J Simons Q2.Address 5225 Grandview Squa, Unit 303 Q3.Comment We fully support this project. We have resided in Edina for over 40 years and have been members of Interlachen through this time. The project will add safety to the property . It will reduce non member traffic on Waterman thru Interlachen to Interlachen Boulevard. Thanks Respondent No:93 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 15:28:39 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 15:28:39 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Amanda Allen Q2.Address 5600 Interlachen Cir Q3.Comment I would like to voice my support of the Interlachen CC plan. Additional parking is needed for the membership and team members. During the summer and special events there are not enough spaces for the staff and members. A less crowded parking lot would improve both experience and safety for members, staff and guests. The closure of Waterman Ave will reduce traffic and improve both safety and livability for residents of the street. Interlachen CC had always been a good neighbor for the area and addressed the watershed and esthetic issues for the project. Respondent No:94 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 15:51:40 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 15:51:40 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Richard Best Q2.Address 3209 Galleria, Unit 902, Edina, MN, 55435 Q3.Comment Interlachen is a good neighbor and responsive to issues as they arise. Parking is needed primarily in the summer months and would get minimal usage other times if the year. I feel this development would also enhance safety. I urge the council to improve this request! Respondent No:95 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 16:02:42 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 16:02:42 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Wayne and Kathie Volland Q2.Address 5000 Oak Bend Lane Q3.Comment This makes all the sense in the world. It will be safer for the neighbors by having a controlled access to ICC. Speed will be reduced and it will limit the "pass through" traffic. Respondent No:96 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 16:22:09 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 16:22:09 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Shelby Aksteter Q2.Address 5817 Xerxes Avenue South, St. Louis park, mn Q3.Comment I am a fellow employee at Interlachen, and would like to show my support for an additional parking area. During our summer months, our parking lot is usually filled by 9AM every day. There are times where members and staff can't find parking, and have to park at the Shepard's church, or curbside, which can make our parking lot crammed and unsafe, and walking to and from work dangerous as well. I would like to think we are very good neighbors considering how close we all live, and with how busy we are. We aren't loud or disruptive at all. I don't see how adding this additional parking area would effect anyone negatively, and would cause less chaos at the club, and overall more safety and security. Respondent No:97 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 17:13:52 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 17:13:52 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Michael Dubes Q2.Address 10683 sonoma ridge Eden prairie Mm Q3.Comment Very big improvement for,the neighborhood Respondent No:98 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 17:14:14 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 17:14:14 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Carrie Carroll Q2.Address 6125 Scotia Dr Q3.Comment Dear Edina City Planning Commission: I am in support of the request by Interlachen Country Club for a conditional use permit for improved and expanded parking for the safety of members and employees. Interlachen has been a good neighbor and listened to nearby residents' concerns, considered them when developing the proposed plan, purchased two additional properties as a buffer to the improvements and gone above and beyond to improve the area's aesthetics. The plan will reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and eliminate the need for valued employees to cross Blake Road to get to their jobs at ICC. As a citizen of Edina and member of Interlachen, I feel strongly this is a good plan for Interlachen members and employees and for the neighbors of Interlachen. Respondent No:99 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 17:47:05 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 17:47:05 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Sandra Davis Q2.Address 6405 Harold woods lane Q3.Comment We love this plan for multiple reasons. It actually reduces the traffic for the residents of Waterman Ave and keeps Interlachen employees from adding to issues in parking way offsite. This plan has also been developed through listening to neighbors concerns. Listening sessions have been used to modify and adapt the plan. I believe this plan is good for Edina, good for nearby residents, good for club employees and ultimately makes Interlachen a better community member. Sandra And Lynn Davis. 6405 Harold Woods Lane Respondent No:100 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 18:39:08 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 18:39:08 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Nathan Rajalingam Q2.Address 4314 Branson Street Q3.Comment An Edina resident and ICC member, the changes will improve safety; the proposed project will reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and eliminate the need for our employees to cross Blake Road from overflow parking at neighboring church. Respondent No:101 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 19:38:28 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 19:38:28 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kyle Rolfing Q2.Address 5816 Northwood Drive Q3.Comment I support this to reduce traffic for residents near ICC and to improve safety/security. Respondent No:102 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 20:12:17 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 20:12:17 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Josh Nimmons Q2.Address 6217 Belmore Ln, Edina Q3.Comment I live two blocks north of this project and I believe the proposed changes will improve the safety of the area. Closing Waterman Ave. to through-traffic will greatly reduce the number of cars and trucks on that residential street. Also, I have seen caddies and other employees crossing Blake Rd. to get to the current overflow parking in the church lot. There is a severe curve in Blake just south of Waterman that reduces visibility and there are no sidewalks in the area. The situation is even worse at night because there is just one streetlight on Waterman. The potential for an unfortunate accident is certainly there with the current setup and would be eliminated by the proposed changes. Respondent No:103 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 20:21:30 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 20:21:30 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Andrew Zinkel Q2.Address 5517 Oaklawn Ave Q3.Comment Interlachen Country Club's plan for this expansion improves safety, reducing traffic on Waterman Avenue and eliminating the need for employees to cross Blake Road from overflow parking at Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran Church. Respondent No:104 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 21:44:37 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 21:44:37 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joe Hensley Q2.Address 5100 W 58th St Q3.Comment Interlachen Country Club has always raised the bar for quality and real estate improvements in Edina since the inception of the club. The club has considered the aesthetics, neighborhood impact, and net improvements extensively and this proposal more than exceeds expectations. This project will be a marked improvement to the current neighborhood, specifically improving the safety and security of the current residents while continuing to improve the value of the real estate surrounding ICC. As an Edina citizen and taxpayer, I recommend the board support and approve this development proposal for the good and growth of the greater Edina community. Respondent No:105 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 21:45:24 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 21:45:24 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tracy Pekarek Q2.Address 6604 Biscayne Blvd, Edina Q3.Comment I believe that the construction of a new parking lot adjacent to the tennis courts at Interlachen Country Club will not only provide much needed additional parking for members, but will also improve public safety by reducing traffic flow along Waterman Avenue. In addition I believe the club has worked hard to create a visually appealing buffer between the parking lot and range areas and the residences on Waterman Avenue. Respondent No:106 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 05:37:48 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 05:37:48 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Nickolas Stukas Q2.Address 6653 Parkwood Road, Edina MN Q3.Comment This project should reduce traffic flow through Waterman Ave and reduce need for use of overflow parking for ICC team members. Think it should be a net positive for both the neighborhood and users/employees of ICC. Respondent No:107 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 06:13:23 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 06:13:23 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Craig E Bentdahl Q2.Address 5101 Mirror Lakes Dr Q3.Comment I'm in favor of ICC's proposal. The additional parking is greatly needed, and it will improve safety on Waterman Avenue by reducing traffic. Respondent No:108 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 07:26:04 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 07:26:04 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lynn Sabre Q2.Address 6501 Harold Woods Ln Q3.Comment We are constantly short on parking for members and guest and it causes many safety concerns. Respondent No:109 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 07:37:11 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 07:37:11 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Bridget Hayden Q2.Address 5101 Ridge Rd., Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment As a parent of two young children, parking near the facilities is needed for safety. The currently available parking is often full making it a challenge to bring the kids to their activities. The proposed additional parking would be a great help. Thank you for your consideration. Respondent No:110 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 09:12:10 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 09:12:10 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joanna Phillips Q2.Address 4424 W 44th St, Edina 55424 Q3.Comment I am in support of the expansion of Interlachen Country Club. I think it will provide nominal interference into the surrounding neighborhood while increasing visual appeal and functionality to said surrounding areas. Respondent No:111 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 09:19:43 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 09:19:43 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Dixon Diebold Q2.Address 5524 Glengarry Parkway, Edina, MN Q3.Comment Interlachen is a valued member of the community. This golf course makes the neighbor's property MORE valuable. This will have minimal to no negative impact on the neighborhood and will be a dramatic improvement to the vacant lot that is there now. Please approve this application. Respondent No:112 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 10:17:06 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 10:17:06 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jodi Capistrant and David Albright Q2.Address 6205 Spruce Road Edina MN Q3.Comment 6/15/2021 RE: Support for approval of the CUP application submitted by Interlachen Country Club Dear City of Edina Planning Commission and City Council Members, Thank you for considering our comments related to the Interlachen Country Club (ICC) Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application to expand the boundaries of the ICC property to the west through the addition of a new parking lot and an expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. Our family was fortunate enough to move to the City of Edina in 2019 after a multi-year search for the “right property”. The Twin Cities has so much to offer in terms of amenities and we seemingly debated all of them up until the moment we had an opportunity to live adjacent to the first green of ICC. Interlachen Country Club is a storied asset to the entire Twin Cities and, more specifically to Edina, MN. When we toured the property where we live now, 6205 Spruce Road, we were immediately thrilled at the prospect of living in a thriving community, joining ICC, and bearing witness to the enjoyment it brings to members and their guests. Given the changes we wanted to make to our new property, we were in touch with our neighbors including the team at ICC to share our ideas and seek their feedback and approvals. Joel Livingood and the ICC team asked if we would be open to additional changes that they believed would both enhance our property and the ICC property. Their suggestions, which we collectively implemented, just made good sense. Our experience has been that ICC management has been reliably open-minded and that they consistently act as good faith neighbors. It is unfortunate that we have read factually incorrect information that may be perpetuating bad feelings towards what we believe is a common sense approach to maintaining and improving the ICC property, supporting the safety of their staff, members and guests (many who are Edina residents), as well as acting as a good neighbor. As members who live to the northwest of the ICC property, we drive south on Blake Road to access the club. We see staff trying to cross Blake Road which can be a bit dicey given the amount of traffic and the curve where Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard connect. And, while we acknowledge that ICC has urged us to use the main entrance off Interlachen Boulevard rather than Waterman Avenue, we are at times guilty of taking this short cut to enter and exit the club property. Upon reflection, we are likely detracting from the experience of those that live on Waterman Avenue and adding to the traffic-related safety concerns of those residents and the staff walking from the leased parking spaces at Shephard of the Hills Lutheran Church. We respect the fact that ICC is proposing to install a gate to regulate traffic on Waterman Avenue with the other proposed property enhancements. The additional parking spaces being proposed are truly needed and will ensure that ICC remains as a functional property (i.e., not dependent upon off-site parking) and provides an even safer environment for those at the club (staff, members, guests) as well as ICC neighbors. The various other concessions and considerations that ICC has made (e.g., purchasing ‘buffer’ properties’, adding plants and trees to enhance environmental stewardship and aesthetics, lighting modifications) again support the notion of ICC as a good neighbor who is attempting to make investments that advance the club’s objectives in consideration of the nearby residents and their preferences. Thank you again for your consideration of our comments and for your service to the City of Edina. Best, Jodi Capistrant & David Albright Respondent No:113 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 10:42:21 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 10:42:21 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Patricia Hyland-Hawver 509 John street. Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment TO: Mayor Hovland, and City Council Members – Staunton, Pierce, Jackson and Anderson DATE: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 RE: Interlachen Proposed Valet Parking and Debris Storage Lot I am writing to introduce myself as the sister of a 3+ year resident of Edina (Christine hyland-lamson) and to open a dialogue on the Interlachen Country Club’s application for a valet parking lot, and debris storage lot in jrt neighborhood. She moved there in spring of 2018. They chose it for the park-like setting, wildlife and open spaces as they started their retirement. They were excited to get to know their lovely neighbors and settle in the community. However, as fate would have it, her husband contracted cancer and they spent the last two years in home-hospice, in the serenity of their home on John Street, where they shared and made memories until his passing. Edina has realized with the planning demands placed on its residential areas that far too many proposed development projects are designed at a scale that is frankly incompatible with our existing neighborhoods. The Interlachen Valen and Debris storage project, is such a project. This construction, is basically an expansion of the country club into a beautiful established residential area, where they are planning to build a large paved parking lot, with additional drainage structures to deal with run off issues that result from their nonpermeable surfaces into a pond that promises to dissipate all runoffs within 24 hours.The lighting required for these structures will constitute light pollution. Noise pollution will be increased via the traffic incursion into this residential neighborhood, as they plan to direct all their delivery trucks through a residential road where trucks will wait in cue for Interlachen’s gate to permit access. The exhaust from these vehicles will affect the residents on this street and the safety of children playing. Noise pollution from speakers that Interlachen already mounts on light poles to broadcast music as well during operational hours will expand to these areas. Mosquito breeding areas will increase as their holding pond for additional run off and collection will provide larger area for mosquito breeding. The residential property that Interlachen has acquired for these purposes also reduces the amount of affordable housing in Edina. These actions, go against the zoning findings, objectives, code of ordinances that the City of Edina has passed and committed itself to. Code 1970;Code 1992, 850.01 I quote “ Through the enactment of the ordinance from which this chapter is derived, the council intends to implement this statement of philosophy so as to provide for the orderly and planned development and redevelopment of lands and waters in the city, to maintain an attractive living and working environment in the city, to maintain an attractive living and working environment in the city, to preserve and enhance the high quality residential character of the city and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare.” Sec. 36-2 Objectives (1) Maintain, protect and enhance single-family detached dwelling neighborhoods as the dominant land use. (3) Control the use, development and expansion of certain nonresidential uses in the Single Dwelling Unit District in order to reduce or eliminate undesirable impacts of such nonresidential uses. “ “Code of Ordinances (5) Provide an enjoyable living environment by preserving existing topography, vegetation, streams, water bodies and other natural land and water forms. (9) Establish requirements for parking and loading to minimize impacts on public streets and surrounding properties. (11) Preserve buildings, lands, areas and districts which possess historical or architectural significance. (12) Protect surface water and groundwater supplies, minimize the possibility of periodic flooding resulting in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards and related adverse effects.” I consider Edina to be her last home, the home where she shared her husband’s last chapter and where, she too wants to grow old. I am concerned for her, about the destruction and removal of heritage trees, vistas, greenspaces for wildlife/birds and the removal of affordable housing. Also, the permanent altering of the chemistry and character of this beautiful neighborhood. Aren’t there better uses for these homes and trees (white pines, red pines) than a parking lot? Surely Edina has a stewardship responsibility with its land and neighborhoods that must be part of these decisions? The proposed take over of Waterman Avenue by the country club for this parking lot is truly alarming. Interlachen has communicated that only delivery trucks will use this access point and that it will be gate- controlled, leaving semi-trucks, diesel exhausted vehicles waiting in cue for entry on a residential street. Police reports to date, indicate that there have been 39 police reports on incidents at the club in its existing parking lots and have posed that perpetrators utilized Waterman as their approach and departure points to Interlachen property. Respectfully submitted and looking forward to your stewardship and response, Patricia Hyland Hawver – sister of Christine Hyland-Lamson 509 John Street 612 384 4124 Respondent No:114 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 11:49:09 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 11:49:09 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kari Lessard Q2.Address 6921 Moccasin Valley Road Q3.Comment This proposal seems fair and responsible. Interlachen has purchased single-family homes as buffer to homes on waterman avenue, and providing these parking spaces will allow the safe entry and exit of employees and personnel without needing to cross Blake road. I fully support this proposal. Respondent No:115 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 11:55:27 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 11:55:27 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Scott Bowlby Q2.Address 5119 Wooddale Glen Q3.Comment The proposed improvement by Interlachen is a wonderful design and it has been well thought out from all parties. In my opinion, it is a major upgrade from the current arrangement. Further, it will make future issues such as traffic & congestion much easier to deal with and lastly, it is a definitive upgrade from an esthetics perspective. Respondent No:116 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 14:43:15 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 14:43:15 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Candace Williams Q2.Address 6108 Westridge Blvd, Edina 55436 Q3.Comment We need additional parking; we are consistently short parking spots for our members, guests, and employees during the summer months. We want to improve safety; the proposed project will reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and eliminate the need for our employees to cross Blake Road from overflow parking at Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran Church. We have been good neighbors; we listened to nearby residents' concerns, considered them when developing the proposed plan, purchased two additional properties as a buffer to the improvements, and went above and beyond to improve the area's aesthetics. Respondent No:117 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 14:45:08 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 14:45:08 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Millie Kosiek Q2.Address 1235 Yale Place, Minneapolis, Mn 55403 Q3.Comment Please support Interlachen Country Club’s request for a Conditional Use Permit. Respondent No:118 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 15:52:57 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 15:52:57 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joshua O'Neill Q2.Address 3717 West Fuller Street Q3.Comment I am in full support of the requested parking expansion plans submitted by Interlachen Country Club ("ICC") and under consideration by the City. Additional safe parking is in high demand, particularly in the Summer months. I believe that the membership at IIC is full and with that and the post COVID urge to get out of the house and people able to work remotely the traffic and daily attendance on average is likely to increase. Members, staff and guests need safe parking alternatives which this plans achieves. It will also reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and allow for employees to park on the premises rather than walking from the overflow parking West of ICC off of Blake Road. ICC has a history of being a very cooperative, collaborative, transparent partner in the community and has gone above and beyond any aesthetic requirements pursuant City Code and has invested in two single family homes, which will remain in place, to help create a buffer with neighbors. This additional parking will add to the aesthetics of the neighborhood, keep traffic contained to the ICC property and provide safe adjacent access to facilities for members, staff and guests. Please approve this request. Respondent No:119 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 17:12:33 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 17:12:33 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tim Kosiek Q2.Address 1235 Yale Place #803 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 Q3.Comment I support the project Respondent No:120 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 21:30:39 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 21:30:39 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Debra Frimerman Q2.Address 6229 Maloney Ave, Edina, MN 55343 Q3.Comment Dear Commissioners: Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on the Interlachen Country Club expansion proposal. The proposed parking lot would be interior to our neighborhood and directly adjacent to my home. This proposal is for an unnecessary expansion of a private country club into a neighborhood contrary to Edina’s Comprehensive Plan and to the detriment of the neighborhood. Our family recently moved to Edina. We purchased what we want to be our forever home down the road from our daughter’s school. Before moving to our home, we reviewed the Edina Comprehensive Plan as part of our decision. The two residential lots that are proposed to be cleared and turned into a large parking lot are designated as low-density residential. Not Public/Semi-Public like the golf course (and its tennis courts, parking lot, club house, and other facilities). No parking lots are contemplated in low-density residential areas. This requested expansion of the country club into our neighborhood and building of a parking lot are contrary to the Comprehensive Plan. Parking lots require buffers. The country club’s drawings include trees as buffer but most of those trees are on my property. Those trees are where my daughter plays and her swing set hangs. If there is a parking lot, our backyard would no longer be safe place for my child to play. We should be able to use our entire property – and not have it be a buffer to the country club's expansion. The country club claims the main reason for the parking lot is for limited use by employees to avoid parking at Shepherd of the Hill church, where they have been parking for years, because there are no sidewalks or crosswalks on Blake Road. The City of Edina is already taking steps to address these concerns with the development of Blake Road scheduled for next summer. The planned Blake Road improvements will benefit the whole neighborhood and will address the country club’s safety concerns. In addition, the Commission recently approved the Shepherd of the Hill’s request for improvements to its parking lot. Approving the country club’s CUP would unnecessarily add additional parking for limited part-time use when there is already ample parking in the area. It is an inefficient use of land that would damage the environment. While the country club purports to be concerned about safety and crime – it says nothing about how building a parking lot interior to our neighborhood drastically decreases the safety of residents. Parking lots are magnets for crime – in fact, they are one of the most common places for crime to occur. The Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that 10% of all crime occurs in parking lots. Kidnappings and assaults are common – for example, a recent study reported 36% of kidnappings were in public places such as parking lots – and in another study one of the top locations for human trafficking abductions was parking lots. Having a concealed parking lot in our backyard where children play is frightening. It is not on a main road or otherwise visible to deter crime. If we had known that it was even a remote possibility that something so unsafe would be in our backyard, we never would have moved here. Please deny the country club’s request. Granting the request will hurt our neighborhood and make our children less safe. It will also undermine the comprehensive planning process. Thank you for your time and consideration. Debra Frimerman Respondent No:121 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 21:36:16 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 21:36:16 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Robert Frimerman Q2.Address 6229 Maloney Ave, Edina, MN 55343 Q3.Comment Dear Edina Planning Commission, I humbly ask the Interlachen Country Club’s C.U.P. application be denied. The request is in contradiction to the comprehensive plan and is opposed by the community collectively. We ask to keep the homes in our neighborhood as homes and not the expansion of the country club. Our family and neighborhoods rely on the comprehensive plan to make decisions that guide the safety and soundness of community. Our home is adjacent to the proposed parking lot. In talking with Joel, country club manager, he explained to me that my home would be the “buffer” they needed from the parking lot, and he wondered why I would need the back of my property. I explained that my 6-year- old and our family use the area he needed for a “buffer” for her swing set. Any project in a residential area that must have a “buffer” is clearly the wrong project for the area. The country club cites safety as the reason to not use the church’s parking lot on Blake Road. I want to thank the City Planners and Commissioners, as you have addressed those concerns for us collectively with the project this year and next to install sidewalks on Blake Road. Joel has also expressed that they agreed to pay for the cul-de-sac to get the project approved. He raised this on multiple occasions. The country club should be able to address the traffic concerns they created without endangering the health and safety of our neighborhood. Simply put, they need to direct their members and employees to use their main entrance and not use Waterman. This should not require a quid-pro-quo to resolve the problems they created. This unfortunate situation by the Country Club has granted me a great opportunity to meet many of my neighbors. A large group of us have been in contact with +80 neighbors. Some have been here for multi-generations, some recent empty nesters and many are just starting out with young families. This last Easter we were invited to our neighborhood’s outdoor annual Easter Egg Hunt, where +30 children and families met to celebrate the holiday. All while practicing social distancing guidance outside, we had the great opportunity to see how many young families are within our neighborhood. We have a vibrant neighborhood here and something that drew us to this area of Edina. I ask that you allow our neighborhood to develop and not allow the country club to continue to take homes and convert them to their expansion and needless development. We ask the City Planning Commission hold to the Comprehensive Plan and not approve the C.U.P. Thank you. Robert Frimerman Respondent No:122 Login:Frank R Thomas Email:nipthomas@yahoo.com Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 21:43:22 pm Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 01:46:01 am IP Address:75.73.69.122 Q1.First and Last Name Frank Thomas Q2.Address 505 John St Q3.Comment My name is Frank Thomas. I have been a resident of Edina for 64 Years. My spouse and I have lived at 505 John St for 46 years. It is the only house we have ever owned. The Conditional Use permit Interlachen has requested should be denied based on the code of Ordinances Edina drafted to control the future development and redevelopment of Edina and placed on Edina's Website. Once read, it is easy to understand why this Conditional Use permit should be denied to place a 35,00 sq foot 105 space commercial asphalt parking lot 80 feet from backyards of single family dwellings in a quiet residential neighborhood. Article 1 Section 36-1 Objective: To implement this statement of philosophy with the following objectives. Section 36-2 Objectives 1)Maintain , protect and enhance single=family detached dwelling neighborhoods as the dominant land use. 3) Control the use, development and expansion of certain nonresidential uses in the single Dwelling Unit District in order to reduce or eliminate undesirable impacts of such nonresidential uses (a huge parking lot for a private club seems to be disqualified by this section). 5) Provide an enjoyable living environment by preserving existing topography, vegetation, streams, water bodies and other land and water forms. 9) Establish requirements for parking and loading to minimize impacts on public streets and surrounding properties. If the above is not enough to deny the Conditional Use Permit here are some other reasons to deny it. I would like to meet any Interlachen member, any Edina resident, any Edina Planning Commission member, any Edina Council member, and any Edina Employee who would like this 35,000 sq foot 105 space Commercial Asphalt parking lot put 80 feet from their back yard lot line. The homeowners who have million dollars or more homes on Interlachen''s 1st, 4th, 5th, 14th, and 15th fairways might have some strong feelings, if it was put 80 feet off their backyard, Our neighborhood should not suffer harm for Interlachens poor, long term plan for additional parking. Interlachen has enlarged all their facilities by 30% or more in last 25 years: the clubhouse, the pro shop, the pool, the pool bathhouse, the tennis courts, the tennis club house, the golf practice area, and the maintenance facility. They also enlarged the membership by 16%, and they certainly have added employees as they have enlarged. Interlachen has less parking now, then they had in the 1970's. As they enlarged all the facilities, they had to take out parking places. A perfect example of this, when Interlachen relandscaped and remodeled their main parking lot. They removed 40 spaces (210 to 170) which is 19%. Interlachen has over 170 acres. They have passed on other opportunities to add parking. They could have added a very nice parking lot to the east side of entrance off Interlachen Boulevard. They used to use this area for parking, for temporary parking but instead of using this perfect place for parking lot they expanded the driving range East and moved entrance road East. The perfect time to have added parking would have been to incorporate in when they built their 24,000 ft new maintenance and storage facility but instead they were more interested in adding another new large golf practice area and sold a lot for $750,000. Our deck and backyard is our cabin and, in the summer, we live on it. We have lived here for 46 years. We already have plenty of noise and light pollution from Interlachen and as they have enlarged the facilities and outdoor events it has grown in the last few years. Their hockey rink lights shine directly into our family room and the clubhouse is lit up like a Christmas tree. Several of our neighbors have spent thousands landscaping their back yards away from grass and toward encouraging and attracting wildlife. It has worked fantastically. We now see more wildlife and birds than ever before in our 46 years. This proposed large parking lot will change that. Interlachen will remove at least 15 to 20 mature trees (20-40 ft) and lots of other vegetation and have to bring in tons of fill to bring the West lot up to the level of the East lot. Whatever vegetation, trees, and shrubbery Interlachen puts in will not look like the nature view we have now. It will be rows of shrubs standing in line like soldiers.The trees will not be mature (20-40 ft) in my lifetime. It will change for the worse backyards and wildlife that our neighborhood enjoys now. How can Edina Planners, Edina Planning Commission, or Edina Council allow Interlachen to remove houses and use for R-1 to put in a 35,000 sq ft 105 space Commercial parking lot on those R-1 lots. Anyone who pays attention knows there is a shortage of affordable housing and affordable lots in Edina. Edina is willing to spend a lot of money for affordable housing. We received an offer this spring from the City of Edina to buy for cash our house if we were were thinking of selling. Edina wanted to buy our house so they could guarantee it would stay affordable housing in Edina. My last comment would be about the neighborhood meeting Interlachen had with the neighborhood. It was very unprofessional and unorganized for the neighborhood people who attended. Interlachen and the architects at the meeting had no measurements of the project when asked. We learned very little of specific details and no measurements. It was so short that not everyone there got to ask a question, We were limited to one question each and half they could not give a specific answer. An Interlachen employee cut the meeting off at 1 hour and 10 minutes even when many still had questions to ask. After the meeting my wife or myself did not speak to anyone who was there that was satisfied or thought it was a good meeting. Respectfully, Frank Thomas Respondent No:123 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 04:44:27 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 04:44:27 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kari Oxford Q2.Address 4915 Bywood St West, Edina, MN. 55436 Q3.Comment I support the conditional use permit at ICC and ask you vote yes to support it too. Respondent No:124 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 05:07:52 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 05:07:52 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Robert and Patty Schopp Q2.Address 6308 Waterman Avenue Q3.Comment We purchased our home in October 1999 from Patty's parents who owned the home from 1963-1999. During the 58 years of living on Waterman Avenue, our relationship with the Interlachen Country Club has been of mutual respect. Through the years we have had good communication from ICC as to events and happenings that would impact our neighborhood. We have considered them good neighbors and respectful of our properties. We were notified of the "Proposed" Conditional Use Permit plan and attended the Monday, April 26 meeting along with several of our neighbors. Several questions and issues were raised at that time and many concerns were shared. We continue to have following concerns regarding this "Proposed" Plan: Loss of woodland and wildlife habitat Loss of nice homes Changes in the aesthetics (trees vs. concrete) Constant nighttime lighting in the backyard and gate area that would be in front of our home Change in easement ownership in our front yard Gate would cause delivery vehicles to stop, wait and go creating more noise & pollution directly in front of our home. (Robert is an asthmatic) We would suggest a phase approach. The vacant lot currently being used for over flow parking could be paved and used as employee parking initially to determine whether additional space is needed. These "proposed" changes could be accomplished gradually, taking in consideration the many concerns we have expressed. We want to continue our good relationship with ICC and work in partnership to accomplish a plan that works for all. Thank you for your consideration. Robert and Patty Schopp Respondent No:125 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 06:19:52 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 06:19:52 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kyle Jorgensen Q2.Address 5404 Interlachen Blvd Q3.Comment I support this project. It is good for the club, the neighborhood and the city. We are luck to have a world class facility like this in our city’s borders. They need to be allowed to execute on their plans. Some points: We need additional parking; we are consistently short parking spots for our members, guests, and employees during the summer months. We want to improve safety; the proposed project will reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and eliminate the need for our employees to cross Blake Road from overflow parking at Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran Church. We have been good neighbors; we listened to nearby residents' concerns, considered them when developing the proposed plan, purchased two additional properties as a buffer to the improvements, and went above and beyond to improve the area's aesthetics. Thank you. Respondent No:126 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 07:40:39 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 07:40:39 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kathy Hendricks Q2.Address 2885 Knox Ave S Minneapolis, MN 55408 Q3.Comment The plan to put a parking lot into a beautiful, serene, green space should not move forward. The impact on the neighborhood and the environment is immeasurable, not to mention the significant impact on the quality of life of the neighbors. Please respect the environment and the neighborhood and do not approve this CUP. Thank you. Respondent No:127 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 08:08:51 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 08:08:51 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Trevor Hawver Q2.Address 509 John St. Edina. Q3.Comment This is a great project to ruin a neighborhood. The road treatments will increase water pollution in the nearby wetlands, the extra light pollution will diminish quality of life for adjacent residents and the extra noise pollution will disturb the neighborhood having an effect on sleep and serenity. The extra road traffic during construction and after will create extra wear and tear on the road and extra nuisance for the houses that are.on the access road. Will the members of Interlachen on the board abstain themselves from voting on this project? There's a conflict of interest there I wish they would address. Respondent No:128 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 08:28:08 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 08:28:08 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Gregg and Barb Dovolis Q2.Address 6805 Dakota Trail - Edina, MN 55439 Q3.Comment We strongly urge the planning commission to approve the proposed changes. Respondent No:129 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 08:51:55 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 08:51:55 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lori Tate Q2.Address 4612 w 56th st Edina Q3.Comment Please do not put a parking lot and storage next to residential property. This is an eyesore and should be illegal!!! Respondent No:130 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 08:59:32 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 08:59:32 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Linda seel Q2.Address 4350 Wooddale ave Q3.Comment Why would you consider damaging a quiet, beautifully landscaped neighborhood cutting down fabulous trees, interrupting nature at its finest, and replacing this beauty with another slab of concrete only to encourage loud traffic, unsightly views for very few individual’s easy access to the country club. Please, please we have destroyed enough of nature’s glory for the benefit of so called progress. Respondent No:131 Login:Will Hyland Email:wbhawver@gmail.com Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 10:16:14 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 10:16:14 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Will Hyland Q2.Address 509 John St. Q3.Comment Hi - As someone who lives in the neighborhood to the west, I have significant concerns about this project. Specifically about light pollution that will be increased in my neighborhood from lights for the parking lot, as well as environmental pollution for the storm water basin that will be implemented in #9 in the diagram above. What steps are being taken to mitigate impacts to the houses to the West of this proposed project? Are members of the city council members of Interlachen? If so, will they be excusing themselves from voting on this project? If there are members, there is a direct conflict of interest here that must be addressed as this project would not provide a benefit to Edina itself and just Interlachen. Thanks, Will Respondent No:132 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 11:21:14 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 11:21:14 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Patricia Hyland Hawver – sister of Christine Hyland-Lamson Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment Hello City Council Member Kevin Staunton: I am writing to introduce myself as the sister of a 3+ year resident of Edina (Christine hyland-lamson) and to open a dialogue on the Interlachen Country Club’s application for a valet parking lot, and debris storage lot in jrt neighborhood. She moved there in spring of 2018 with her spouse. They chose it for the park-like setting, wild life and open spaces as they started their retirement. They were excited to get to know their lovely neighbors and settle in the community. However, as fate would have it, her husband contracted cancer and they spent the last two years in home-hospice, in the serenity of their home on John Street, where they shared and made memories until his passing. During your campaign for office you stated “ Far too many proposed development projects are designed at a scale that is frankly incompatible with our existing neighborhoods.” The Interlachen Proposed Valet Parking and Debris Storage Lot, is such project. This construction, is basically expansion of the country club into a beautiful established residential area, where they are planning to build a large paved parking lot, with additional drainage structures to deal with run off issues that result from their non permeable surfaces into a pond that promises to dissipate all runoffs within 24 hours.The lighting required for these structures will constitute light pollution. Noise pollution will be increased via the traffic incursion into this residential neighborhood, as they plan to direct all their delivery trucks through a residential road where trucks will wait in cue for Interlachen’s gate to permit access. The exhaust from these vehicles will affect the residents on this street and the safety of children playing. Noise pollution from speakers that Interlachen already mounts on light poles to broadcast music as well during operational hours will expand to these areas. Mosquito breeding areas will increase as their holding pond for additional run off and collection will provide larger area for mosquito breeding. The residential property that Interlachen has acquired for these purposes also reduces the amount of affordable housing in Edina. These actions, go against the zoning findings, objectives, code of ordinances that the City of Edina has passed and committed itself to. Code 1970;Code 1992, 850.01 I quote “ Through the enactment of the ordinance from which this chapter is derived, the council intends to implement this statement of philosophy so as to provide for the orderly and planned development and redevelopment of lands and waters in the city, to maintain an attractive living and working environment in the city, to maintain an attractive living and working environment in the city, to preserve and enhance the high quality residential character of the city and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare.” Sec. 36-2 Objectives (1) Maintain, protect and enhance single-family detached dwelling neighborhoods as the dominant land use. (3) Control the use, development and expansion of certain nonresidential uses in the Single Dwelling Unit District in order to reduce or eliminate undesirable impacts of such nonresidential uses. “ “Code of Ordinances (5) Provide an enjoyable living environment by preserving existing topography, vegetation, streams, water bodies and other natural land and water forms. (9) Establish requirements for parking and loading to minimize impacts on public streets and surrounding properties. (11) Preserve buildings, lands, areas and districts which possess historical or architectural significance. (12) Protect surface water and groundwater supplies, minimize the possibility of periodic flooding resulting in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards and related adverse effects.” I consider Edina to be her last home, the home where she shared her husband’s last chapter and where, she too wants to grow old. I am concerned for her, about the destruction and removal of heritage trees, vistas, greenspaces for wildlife/birds and the removal of affordable housing. Also, the permanent altering of the chemistry and character of this beautiful neighborhood. Aren’t there better uses for these homes and trees (white pines, red pines) than a parking lot? Surely Edina has a stewardship responsibility with its land and neighborhoods that must be part of these decisions? The proposed take over of Waterman Avenue by the country club for this parking lot is truly alarming. Interlachen has communicated that only delivery trucks will use this access point and that it will be gate- controlled, leaving semi-trucks, diesel exhausted vehicles waiting in cue for entry on a residential street. Police reports to date, indicate that there have been 39 police reports on incidents at the club in its existing parking lots and have posed that perpetrators utilized Waterman as their approach and departure points to Interlachen property. Respectfully submitted and looking forward to your stewardship and response. -Submitted by City Staff. Testimony received June 16, 2021 12:31 PM Respondent No:133 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 11:22:41 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 11:22:41 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ron Nelson Q2.Address 421 John St. Q3.Comment I am totally fine with the proposal. I live right around the corner from Interlachen Country Club. They’ve been a good neighbor. I think people should be allowed what they choose with their property. I don’t see this doing any harm to the area at all. Thank you. -Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received June 14, 2021 2:50 PM Respondent No:134 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 11:23:42 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 11:23:42 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Cathleen Cachat Q2.Address N/A Q3.Comment I’m an Edina resident over at Interlachen Country Club. I just wanted to give my input regarding the proposed parking at Interlachen Country Club. They desperately need the parking. It’s getting very dangerous to drive in that parking lot because so many cars have to park on the edge and there are golf carts driving through. I have also seen how many cars drive on Waterman Street through the residential street. People cut through there and it has got to be an inconvenience. With the additional parking and the gate, it will just make a really clear line for where the property begins and ends. Everything that Interlachen does is with such grace and has so much taste. I feel very strongly that they will do whatever it takes to accommodate the neighbor’s concerns. It will be done beautifully. I just wanted to express and give my input. Thank you. -Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received June 15, 2021 2:23 PM June 23 2021 Planning Commission Cary Teague, Community Development Director Conditional Use Permit with Variances – 6200 Interlachen Boulevard (West side of Interlachen Country Club on Waterman Avenue) Information / Background: Interlachen Country Club is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to expand the boundaries of the Country Club and add a new parking lot and expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. There are two single-family homes, owned by the Country Club, that would continue as single-family homes that would serve as a buffer to the single-family homes to the west. A gate would be constructed at the end of Waterman Avenue, just past the single- family homes owned by the Country Club. (See attached narrative and plans.) The gate would be closed for access to the Club from Waterman for the purpose of employees, members, guests, and delivery trucks to use the main entrance off Interlachen Boulevard. The Country Club would be constructing the new cul-de-sac and roadway improvements at their expense. A Conditional Use Permit is required for the expanded parking area and boundaries of the Country Club. Golf Courses are a conditionally permitted use in the R-1, Single-Dwelling Unit District. The expansion is requested to address several issues that the Country Club is experiencing including the following: Shortage of parking for members and employees. The Club currently rents space at Shepard of the Hills Lutheran Church for employees to park. There is a safety concern for employees parking in that lot and then walking to Club and having to cross Blake Road and down Waterman Avenue. The new parking lot is intended to be primarily used by employees and for overflow parking during the busy times of the year, mainly during the summer. STAFF REPORT Page 2 Traffic on Waterman. The Club receives a lot of complaints from nearby residents about the volume of traffic on Waterman Avenue. As a public street the Club cannot control its use. Security. Eliminating the access to the Club off Waterman adds a layer of security for the Club. They have experienced an increase in vehicle break-ins and auto theft in recent years and believe that most suspects enter the Club off Waterman, as it is much less visible that the main entrance on Interlachen Boulevard. Limited practice facilities. Due to the advancement in golf club technology and increase in golfer’s desire for practice facilities has created a need to lengthen the driving range and add a putting green. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single-family homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Easterly: Single-family homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single-family homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single-family homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features The area where the improvements are proposed contain single-family homes and a gravel area, where a single-family was removed. Planning Guide Plan designation: Public/semi-public and low-density residential Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District Conditional Use Permit Per Section 36-305, the City Council shall not grant a Conditional Use Permit unless it finds that the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use: 1. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements. The project would not have an adverse impact on the above. Both police and fire would be able to access the country club via Waterman as they do today. Any condition of approval of this project would require that both police and fire would maintain this access in the future. The Club has worked with police and fire regarding public access in the design the gate to ensure the ability for police and fire to easily get in. Knox Box access for the Fire Department and STAFF REPORT Page 3 Police Department must be provided at all gates. The existing utilities are adequate to serve the proposed use. 2. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property. The project would enhance the entrance to the club on Interlachen Boulevard and reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue. A gate would be installed on Waterman to block members, employees, vendors, and guests from using the Waterman entrance. The primary entrance to the country club would be off Interlachen as intended. The only traffic permitted on Waterman would be delivery trucks that cannot navigate access to the loading dock via Interlachen Boulevard, and emergency vehicles. The uses within the country club all remain the same. 3. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety, or welfare. Staff does not believe the project would have an adverse impact on public health, safety, or welfare. The applicant wants to make sure that all emergency services can always access the site off Waterman Avenue. This condition would be part of any approval on the site. As mentioned, police and fire have reviewed the plans and have met with the applicant and are confident that they will be able to access the site as needed. 4. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity. Staff believes the improvements would enhance the area and create a clear boundary for the Country Club. The parking area and practice area would be well screened with a solid row of evergreen shrubs consisting of Cotoneaster Lucidus, Juniperus, and Taxus Cuspidata capitata. (See renderings and landscape plan.) This would include the changes to the plans recommended by the city forester. (See memo from the city forester.) Additionally, the Club would own the two single-family dwellings adjacent to the parking lot and practice green. These homes further provide separation and screening of the expansion area. Lighting would be limited within the lot; fixtures would be downcast and be required to meet the City’s lighting standards. Section 36-1260 of the City Code requires the following for lighting: “All exterior lighting and illuminating devices shall be provided with lenses, reflectors or shades so as to concentrate illumination on the property of the owner or operator of the lighting or illuminating devices. Rays of light or illumination shall not pass beyond the property lines of the premises utilizing the lights or illumination at an intensity greater than 0.5 foot- candle measured at property lines abutting property zoned residential and one foot-candle measured at property lines abutting streets or property zoned nonresidential. No light source, lamp or luminaire shall be directed beyond the boundaries of the lighted or illuminated premises.” This shall be made a condition of any approval. The plans include a stormwater retention area on the north side of the parking lot. The plans direct runoff from Waterman and the parking lot to the stormwater retention area to filter out sediment. STAFF REPORT Page 4 Based on the above, staff does not believe the new parking lot and practice area would impede the normal and orderly development of other property in the area. As mentioned earlier, these uses are allowed in the R-1 Zoning District as a conditionally permitted use. The screening and the gate are proposed to mitigate impacts on the single-family homes. 5. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located as imposed by this Section. The proposed project meets all city code provisions. Golf courses are a permitted use within the R-1 Zoning District. Parking areas are a conditionally permitted use within the R-1 District. 6. Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As mentioned previously, golf courses are a permitted use, and parking areas are a conditionally permitted use within the R-1 Zoning District. No variances are requested. The main golf course has public/semi-public land use designation and the single-family lots have a low-density residential designation. No amendment is needed to the comprehensive plan as the uses are permitted in the R-1 Zoning District. Landscaping The parking area and practice area would be screened with a solid row of evergreen shrubs consisting of Cotoneaster Lucidus, Juniperus, and Taxus Cuspidata capitata. (See renderings and landscape plan.) This evergreen screening would provide year around screening of automobile headlights within the parking lot. The evergreens along the north side of the parking lot would be 6-foot tall and planted as a double row. The west side would be 4 feet tall. The nearest home to the west would be 250 feet away; and the nearest home to the north about 225 feet away. The city forester has reviewed the proposed landscape plan and has recommended some revisions. (See attached memo.) The revisions would include planting 2.5” caliper trees for the replacement trees; and the Taxus Cuspidata or upright yews planted along the west side of the parking lot for screening should be planted to be 6 feet tall instead of 4 feet. Grading/Drainage/Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be acceptable subject to the comments and conditions outlined in their review memo attached. Any approvals of this project would be subject to review and approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Districts, as they are the City’s review authority over the grading of the site. STAFF REPORT Page 5 Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North lot line South lot line West line East lot line 20 feet 20 feet 10 feet 20 feet 85 – 110 feet 280 feet 1000+ feet 1000+ feet PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issue • Is the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) criteria met? Yes, staff believes the criteria is met. 1. The proposed project meets all city code provisions and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Golf courses are a permitted use within the R-1 Zoning District, uses accessory to a golf course, such as tennis courts, swimming pools, driving ranges, practice facilities and other related recreational uses are also permitted. Parking areas are a conditionally permitted use within the R-1 District. 2. The main golf course has public/semi-public land use designation and the single-family lots have a low-density residential designation. No amendment is needed to the comprehensive plan as the overall uses are permitted or conditionally permitted in the R-1 Zoning District. 3. As demonstrated on pages 2-4 of this report, the proposal meets the conditional use permit criteria. 4. The parking lot and practice area would be adequately screened with the recommendations from the city forester, including the planting 2.5” caliper trees for the replacement trees; and the Taxus Cuspidata or upright yews planted along the west side of the parking lot for screening be planted to be 6 feet tall instead of 4 feet. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit at 6200 Interlachen Boulevard for the expanded parking area and expansion to the Country Club Boundaries. Approval is subject to the following findings: STAFF REPORT Page 6 1. The proposed project meets all city code provisions and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Golf courses are a permitted use within the R-1 Zoning District, uses accessory to a golf course, such as tennis courts, swimming pools, driving ranges, practice facilities and other related recreational uses are permitted. Parking areas are a conditionally permitted use within the R-1 District. 2. The main golf course has public/semi-public land use designation and the single-family lots have a low-density residential designation. No amendment is needed to the comprehensive plan as the overall uses are permitted in the R-1 Zoning District. 3. As demonstrated on pages 2-4 of this report, the proposal meets the conditional use permit criteria. 4. The proposed plans would reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue entering the Country Club. 5. The Club would not have to rely on parking outside of the Country Club site for employees. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The Construction Plans must be consistent with the proposed Development Plans dated May 3, 2021, and the project renderings dated April 28, 2021. 2. The Final Landscape Plan must be revised to include the following subject to review and approval of the city forester: The planting 2.5” caliper trees for the replacement trees; and the Taxus Cuspidata or upright yews planted along the west side of the parking lot for screening should be planted to be 6 feet tall instead of 4 feet tall. 3. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance and be consistent with the Landscape Plan dated May 3, 2021. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures at the time of any building permit. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies after the project is built. 4. Final lighting plan must meet the lighting requirements of Section 36-1260 of the City Code. All exterior lighting and illuminating devices shall be provided with lenses, reflectors or shades so as to concentrate illumination on the property of the owner or operator of the lighting or illuminating devices. Rays of light or illumination shall not pass beyond the property lines of the premises utilizing the lights or illumination at an intensity greater than 0.5 foot-candle measured at property lines abutting property zoned residential and one foot-candle measured at property lines abutting streets or property zoned nonresidential. No light source, lamp or luminaire shall be directed beyond the boundaries of the lighted or illuminated premises. 5. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the city engineer’s memo dated June 16, 2021. STAFF REPORT Page 7 6. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the building official and fire marshal memo dated June 17, 2021. Knox Box access for the Fire Department and Police Department must be provided at all gates. 7. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the city forester memo dated June 17, 2021. 8. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements. Deadline for a city decision: August 17, 2021 June 17, 2021 Cary Teague, Community Development Director David Fisher, Chief Building Official & Rick Hammerschmidt, Fire Marshall Conditional Use for Interlachen Country Club at 6200 Interlachen Blvd to Add Parking, Putting Green and Practice Tee Information / Background: The proposed plan improvement to the western portion of the property near Waterman Ave is to add parking, putting green and practice tee. - Provide Knox Box access for the Fire Department at all gates. - Verify fire hydrant location outside of gate for the Fire Department. - Provide accessible parking and access isle with an accessible route to the practice tee and putting green. The accessible route that runs from the parking area must not be greater than a 5% slope with a greater than 2% cross slope. Must have new fire hydrant by the main entry. - Provide the required accessible parking spaces and access isles per the building code based on the number of parking spaces. - Verify Noise Ordinance is understood and will be compliant: Working Hours: Monday – Friday 7 A.M. to 7 P.M. Saturdays – 9A.M. to 5 P.M. Sundays and Holidays – No Work Allowed. 273548.DOCX M ALKERSON G UNN M ARTIN L L P 5353 G AMBLE D RIVE , S UITE 225 M INNEAPOLIS , M INNESOTA 55416 T ELEPHONE 612-344-1111 F ACSIMILE 612-344-1414 Patrick B. Steinhoff Attorney at Law Direct: 612.455.6601 pbs@mgmllp.com June 16, 2021 Planning Commission City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Interlachen Country Club Conditional Use Permit Application Our File No. 3584.001 Dear Members of the Planning Commission: I represent Robert and Debra Frimerman, who live at 6229 Maloney Avenue in the City of Edina (“City”). I write on their behalf to state their opposition to the conditional use permit (“CUP”) requested by Interlachen Country Club (“Country Club”) for a proposed new parking lot. The Country Club’s application does not satisfy the requirements necessary for CUP approval established by the City’s zoning ordinance, including (but not limited to) the requirement that a CUP be consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. The parking lot proposed by the County Club is simply not consistent with the comprehensive plan designation for the parking lot site (which is different from the comprehensive plan designation for the rest of the County Club property). For this reason, it would be unlawful of the City to approve the CUP application, and the Planning Commission should therefore recommend denial. I. THE PROPOSED PARKING LOT DOES NOT SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CUP APPROVAL SET FORTH IN THE CITY’S ZONING ORDINANCE. The Frimermans’ home is immediately adjacent to Country Club property to the north of the proposed parking lot site. The Frimermans’ home, the proposed parking lot site and the Country Club are all zoned R-1 (Single Dwelling Unit District). “Publicly and Privately owned golf courses” are permitted uses in R-1 zoning districts. City Code, § 36-433(3). Both “Golf course clubhouses” and “Parking facilities and other uses which are accessory to conditional uses” are conditional uses in R-1 zoning districts. City Code, § 36-434(4). Accordingly, a parking lot is allowable as a conditional use, but only if it is an accessory to a golf course club house (or to Edina Planning Commission June 16, 2021 Page | 2 273548.DOCX some other conditional use)1 and also only if the Country Club satisfies the requirements for CUP approval set forth in the City’s zoning ordinance. Minnesota law requires that a city may lawfully approve a CUP only upon “a showing by the applicant that the standards and criteria stated in the [city’s zoning] ordinance will be satisfied.” Minn. Stat. § 462.3595, subd. 1 (2017); see also RDNT, LLC v. City of Bloomington, 861 N.W.2d 71, 76-78 (Minn. 2015) (holding that a city’s decision to approve or deny a conditional use permit must have a factual basis in the record and must also meet the requirements specified by the relevant zoning ordinance). An applicant has the burden to show that it satisfies the applicable requirements for CUP approval. RDNT, LLC, 861 N.W.2d at 78. Here, the Country Club cannot meet its burden of showing that it satisfies the standards for CUP approval set forth in the City’s zoning ordinance. The provision of the City’s zoning ordinance stating the requirements for CUP approval reads in relevant part as follows: The council shall not grant a conditional use permit, unle ss it finds that the establishment, maintenance and operation of the use: *** (3) Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare; *** (6) Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. City Code, § 36-305. At the very least, the parking lot proposed by the Country Club fails to satisfy the two subparagraphs identified above. First, the proposed parking lot does not satisfy Section 36-305(3) because it will have “an undue adverse impact on the public healt h, safety or welfare,” particularly that of the Frimermans and their neighbors. Through the construction of a parking lot, the Country Club proposes to extend its facilities into an established residential neighborhood. The proposed parking lot will irrevocably change the characteristics that currently make the neighborhood such an attractive place to live and raise children. Second, the proposed parking lot does not satisfy Section 36-305(6) because it is not consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. The site of the parking lot is guided LDR (Low Density Residential) in the comprehensive plan. The rest of the Country Club is guided PSP (Public/Semi-Public) in the comprehensive plan. In the “Future Land Use” map in the comprehensive plan, there is a clear boundary between the proposed parking lot site (colored yellow for “LDR”) and the remainder of the Country Club (colored Blue for “PSP”). An excerpt 1Based on information provided by the Country Club to its neighbors, it appears that the Country Club may intend to use this parking lot to provide employee parking for golf course caddies . It also apparently intends to use the lot for valet parking for its dining/banquet/athletic facilities. Such use is not allowed by the City’s zoning ordinance. If approved, the parking lot can only be used as an accessory to the club house. Edina Planning Commission June 16, 2021 Page | 3 273548.DOCX of this map is inserted below for your convenient reference (with a house symbol in the location of the Frimermans’ home and a car symbol in the location of the proposed parking lot). (Comprehensive Plan, Figure 3.12, p. 3-26). The City’s comprehensive plan also includes narrative descriptions of the “LDR (Low Density Residential)” and “PSP (Public/Semi-Public)” future land use categories. These descriptions are inserted below for your convenient reference: Edina Planning Commission June 16, 2021 Page | 4 273548.DOCX (Comprehensive Plan, Table 3.6, pp. 3-28, 3-32). In these narrative descriptions, there is no suggestion that golf course facilities or parking lots in general are appropriate uses in LDR guided areas. To the contrary, the narrative description for PSP guided areas expressly states that there should be “buffering” standards for parking. In other words, even when parking uses are confined to the areas guided PSP (which is not the case here), they are supposed to be buffered from adjoining uses. Here, the Country Club is proposing a parking lot located outside the area guided PSP which intrudes into a residential neighborhood with no buffering. This is clearly not compatible with guidance set forth in the comprehensive Plan. The proposed parking lot will have adverse impacts on the public welfare and will be inconsistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. As the Country Club fails to satisfy at least two of the requirements necessary for CUP approval, the City is legally prohibited from approving the Country Club’s application. For this reason, the Planning Commission should recommend denial. II. THE FRIMERMANS AND OTHER RESIDENTS ARE ENTITLED TO RELY ON THE CITY’S ZONING ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. The Frimermans are very recent newcomers to Edina. They purchased their home in December 2020 and chose its location based on its seeming suitability for raising a family. In doing so, they carefully researched the surrounding area and reviewed, among other things, the City’s zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan (which, as noted, very specifically places the boundary of the PSP designation to the east of the proposed parking lot site). If the Frimermans had known that it was even a remote possibility that their back yard would be adjacent to a parking lot, the Frimermans would not have purchased their home. Other residents of the Frimermans’ neighborhood doubtlessly also made similar calculations when deciding where to live and raise their families. Allowing the Country Club to extend beyond the area designated for PSP uses in the comprehensive plan would be unfair to the Frimermans and other residents. Moreover, it would not be unreasonable to expect the Country Club to confine its operations to the area designated for PSP uses in the comprehensive plan. It is surely possible for the Country Club to find a more appropriate site for its parking lot. The Country Club occupies a massive swath of land, almost all of which is zoned and guided in a way that allows for construction of the proposed parking lot. There is no need for the Country Club to extend beyond the very large area designated for PSP uses and to intrude into an area that has been specifically designated by the City Council for future Edina Planning Commission June 16, 2021 Page | 5 273548.DOCX use as a residential neighborhood. For this reason, the Planning Commission should recommend denial of the Country Club’s application. III. CONCLUSION. By designating the parking lot site as LDR in the comprehensive plan, the City Council has already acted legislatively and made a policy-level determination that a parking lot is not appropriate for the proposed site. I therefore respectfully request that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council deny the CUP application as it is legally obliged to do. The Frimermans and many other residents of their neighborhood will be present at the Planning Commission public hearing to voice their opposition to the proposed parking lot; to answer any questions the members of the Planning Commission may have of them; and to provide the Planning Commission with any requested additional information. Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of this letter. MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP /s/: Patrick B. Steinhoff Patrick B. Steinhoff PBS/ksk c: Clients City Attorney ¹» ¹» ¹º¹º ¹º ñ ñ ¹» ¹º ¹º ¹º ¹º ¹º ¹º ñ ¹» ñ ñ ñ ñ Lake Edina Lake Cornelia Indianhead Lake Arro wh ead Lake Mud Lake Ha wkes LakeMirr o r L a k e Hi gh lands Lake Melody Lake Harv ey Lake Lake Pam ela HWY 62 HWY 62 HWY 100HWY 100HWY 169HWY 16966TH S T W 70TH S T W 76TH S T W FRANCE AVE SYORK AVE SVALLEYVIEWRD70TH S T W VALLEY V IEW RD DEW EY HILL RD CAHILL RDSCHAEFER RDBLAKE RDTRACY AVEHANSEN RDGLEASONRDVERNON AVEVERNON AVEINTER LACH EN BLV D MALONEY AV E 50TH S T W 4 4 T H ST W 54TH S T W 58TH S T WWOODDALE AVEVALLEY VIEW RD I-494 City Hall Public Works Fire Station 2 Fire Station 1 Public Library Concord School Cornelia School Highland School Sout hd ale Library EdinaHigh School Our Ladyof Grace Count ryside School Creek V alleySchool NormandaleElementary EdinaCommunityCenter Gold en YearsMontessori AvailAcademy Valley V iewMiddle School St PetersLutheran School Sout hviewMiddle School August 2019± Lege nd R-1 - Single Dwe lling U nit R-2 - Double Dwelling U nit PRD-1 - Planne d Res ide nce PRD-2 - Planne d Res ide nce PRD-3 - Planne d Res ide nce PRD-4 - Planne d Res ide nce PRD-5 - Planne d Res ide nce PC D-1 - Planned Co mm ercial PC D-2 - Planned Co mm ercial PC D-3 - Planned Co mm ercial PC D-4 - Planned Co mm ercial POD-1 - Planned O ffice POD-2 - Planned O ffice RM D - Regional M edical PID - Plann ed In dus trial PU D - Planned U nit Develo pment APD - Aut om otive Parking PSR-4 - Planned Residence MDD-4 - Mixe d Deve lo pme nt MDD-5 - Mixe d Deve lo pme nt MDD-6 - Mixe d Deve lo pme nt Lakes Creeks Edina Boundar y Railroad ñ Pub lic B uilding ¹ºPub lic Schoo l ¹»Pr ivate Schoo l 0 970Feet W 50T H ST MARKET ST W 49TH ST HALIFAX AVEARDEN AVEMAPLE RDFRANCE AVE SINDIANOLA AVEJUANITA AVEW 51ST ST ¹»St Peter'sLutheran School W 54TH ST FULLER ST FRANCE AVE SHALIFAX LNHALIFAX AVEW 61ST ST W 62ND ST VALLEY VIEW RD WOODDALE AVEKELLOGG AVEOAKLAWN AVEBROOKVIEW AVEG AR R IS O N L N F AIRFAXAVE FRANCE AVE SYORK AVE SXERXES AVE SW 69T H ST W 66T H ST VALLEYVIEWRDFRANCE AVE SSANDELL AVELYMAR LNBRISTOL RDW 70TH ST HAZELTON RD MAVELLE DRSUNNYSIDE RDW 4 4 T H ST MOR NINGSIDE RD FRANCE AVECURVE AVEETON PLñ ED EN A VEW 50TH ST WILSON RDHWY 100GRANGERD¹» ñ ED EN A V EVERNON AVEHANKERSON AVEWILLIAM AVEBEDFORD AVEOXFORD AVEW 51ST ST INTERLACHEN BLVD ARCADIA AVEGRANDVIEW LNHWY 100Our Ladyof GraceCanadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadZoning Map GRANDVIEW 44T H & F RANCE 50T H & F RANCE 54T H & F RANCE VALLEY V IEW & W OODDALE SOUT HD ALE 70T H & F RANCE WILSON & EDEN CAHILL & 70TH N i n e M i l e Creek N in e Mile C r e e k M inn e h a ha Creek Canadian Pacific RailroadCit y Hall CAHILL RDAMUNDSON AVEW 70T H ST VILLAGE D R CREEK VIEW LN LIMERICK LN ?úA@ ?úA@ ?ÞA@ +¡ %&f( +¡CodeM ilwaukee1st WolfeGarrison ParkB i r c h c r e s tBlueCircle Ra l e i g h Belmore Northland169Concord45th EdinboroughE d in a In d u s tr ia lGusYoung 7th Ramp LynnZarthanLouisianaAlabamaO xford65th LinkPolk 494 S o u th to w nPierceGallagherBenton 6 2Harrison Lakeview 2 1 2 66th H a z e lt o n L a g u n a HibiscusPark NicolletWymanTownesOttawaNormandaleYorkGrangeGolf MerrittPennsylvaniaMinnetonkaMills Interlachen ParklawnSkylineChantrey R edCeda r V a lle y V ie w 52nd StuartDuncanCountryside Wexford40th 41st RedFox XenwoodAbercrombie 42nd 43rd 10064thWaterfordRose MavelleBissenWy c liff e Grove C o u n t r yClub DuncraigTingdaleAspen WestbrookJohnsonIndian LondonderryBrookwood GleasonBarrieHobartLaradaNorthw ood Farmdale OaklawnS aint Louis70 1/2Par k wood69t h 71 1/2Malibu HeathertonCooperContinental67th Nancy 75th 76thOverholtBelloIndianPondAshleyParkside58th 60th B e rn e 59th ArbourTrillium Sherman EnsignPheasant51st D a r c y 49 1 /2 I n d i a n H i l l s 50th Langford 4 3 1 /2Yosemite Indianola7 GreenFarmsEdinaValleyBruceKent Morningside Flying C loudVernonJacksonC h a l i c e Spruce Lyle SallyArcadiaBraemarRyanB re n d a n WashingtonFranceCheyenneP h l o x 6th Stauder HalifaxKiplingJoppaInglewoodBlakeK e n t u c k y HuntingtonGlenhurstEdgewoodOlingerWellesley38th AkersGardenRuth68th Ashcroft39th TylerIv y ZenithGlenroyAbbottPost Ir o q u o i s CahillH a w k e s MackeyKresseBrittanyLarkspurComanch eM a r t h Southview SidellB r i d g e BalfanzLauraParnell LeeValley 5th 63r d Eri n 56th VirginiaBrookviewParkvie w 48thPr i ncet onRidgeview47th Millers49th 54th WoodcrestWaterman TaraDovre Li meri ckKenneyJeffrey 72nd Goodrich Boyce P r e s to n Malone y 46th 4 4 t h 70th Division 55th Porter C ro y d en Warden Circle East 3rd Biscayne Meadow 62nd Bluff McCauley Coolidge57th TracyBlake Ridge DunberrySun Glendale GoyaH ig h la n d A b b ie Duggan AndoverBrooksideAyrshire WoodlandHabitat2nd West Shore7 8 t h V il l a g eDakota Rabun PineGrove Highway 62FrontageWarwickCorneliaJayV allacherViewMapleHillMarkTerrace CrescentW hi t in g W o o d h illMurphyAnnaway Oakdal ePolar Dubl i nHi ghway 100Fr ont ageSheridan81st Brook Bonnie Brae C re s tHarveyMirror LakesW a y s i d e DundeeBush LakeS u n n y s id e JudsonDearbornVermont 77thCecilia D ew e yHillArthurExcelsior Gl enShaughnessyGlacier MildredApache Sout hcr est LakeRidge SpurScandiaHydePark53rd AutoClub GalwayStonewoodNorman Creek FoxMeadow Viking W ood EndMaddox MelodyLakeRutledgeHilltop SchaeferCreekridgePowellH e r ita g e TupaKelloggWood HaroldWoods ChowenSouthTelemark ComputerHilary 80th StreetCrestonPointClaremore GrimesM erila n e Park CenterWe sto n LochloyMontereyM a rk e tp o in te OxboroughEtonOhmsC h er o k e e VandervorkOak Grace RidgePark L a n t a n aMo c c a s i nVa ll e y SandellWashburnCu r v e RolfG ate P ark CoventryLincolnBristolM i n n e s o t aGriffitHidden DoronNineMileBren R ob e rt s B y w o o d W e st LochmereWooddaleC r e e k V i e w TierneysWoodsMain str ee t B r a e b u r n DoncasterDelaneyQuenti nHia w ath a OakwoodAdamsMadisonJeffersonBeardGlasgow GorgasVan BurenD o w n TownLine Clover GalleriaBlackfootMaitHansen 73rd Tanglewood61st Dar t W illow W oodWilryanXerxesThielenBedfordUptonVincentDrewJuanitaFairfaxSaintJohnsTowerWilliam FullerMaple BernardDaleHill Lois Saxony SherwoodH u n t e r BrunswickHollyIkola E d e n m o or AntrimNaomiJohnHarrisWalnutGilford B a l de rMonroe Pondwood BrowndaleUpperSalemUticaToledoRichwoodOakBendMeadowbrook Tifton C la r e d o n GrandviewShannonKelseyDeverMargaretsWebsterRosemaryN orthColgate Forslin Belvidere S c o t i a Me l ody K a y m a r Scriver NewportDevilleWarrenEdgebrookRolli ngGr eenW i n d s o r Si o u x SouthdaleTelegraphShaneChapelDawsonCamelbackLak e Cambridge Creek S e d u m Knoll 78th StreetHillsideE a stvie w E d e n S c h o o lPaiute S a m ue l LanhamSunnysl opeMcI nt yr eOakglenSusan GlouchesterEvanswood CascoMcGuire Green Valley Mendelssohn TamaracDrexelArdenGlenbraeWillsonDanens Field Colorado71st Dunham Hig h w o o d West AmundsonHealthCare MeroldRidgeway LeaJeff American N ordic MonardoEwingHamilton Yvonne HillcrestLewisRidgeGlengarryCircle WestW estwoodOpportunityPoppySchey ThomasWilford B r a n s o n Go l d e nTri a n g l e CrockerAldenScottSmetanaFondellIdylwood A m y TimberNavaho Philbrook ColonyL o n g B ra k e MinnehahaPeacedaleKi l l ar neyLoch Moor Colonial VillaFleetwoodPictureShady OakRidgeHighway 169Frontage74thCreekValley A r c t ic MetroForest Glen Edina 2040 Comprehensive Plan Edina, Minnesota DRAFT Future Land Use October 2019 0 3,700Feet Source: City of Edina, Hennepin County, MetCouncil, MnDOT !ILegendLow Density Residential Low Density Attached Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Greater Southdale District Residential Office Residential Office Neigborhood Node Mixed Use Center Community Activity Center Industrial Open Space and Parks Public/Semi Public Regional Medical City Limits