HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZ Packet 08.22.2019AGENDA
HUGO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
AUGUST 22, 2019
6:30 PM
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. ROLL CALL (Arcand, Mulvihill, Weidt)
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. June 13, 2019.
D. PUBLIC HEARING
1. MWF Properties — Variance request for the height of Rosemary Apartments.
E. NEW BUSINESS
F. OLD BUSINESS
G. ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES
HUGO BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
JUNE 13, 2019
Chairperson Weidt called the meeting to order at 6:29 p.m.
Roll Call
PRESENT: Arcand, Mulvihill, Weidt.
ABSENT: None.
ALSO PRESENT: Rachel Juba, Community Development Director
Emily Weber, Community Development Assistant
Approval of Minutes
Arcand made a motion, Mulvihill seconded, to approve the minutes for May 9, 2019, as presented.
All Ayes. Motion carried.
Oman Variance Request, 6900 170th Street North — Variance request from the Shoreland
Overlay District setback requirements.
Staff provided background on the variance request and recommended the Board open the public
hearing and take public comment. Staff recommended approval of the variance request from
Pamela Oman, located at 6900 170th Street North, to allow a house addition to be setback 80 feet
from the ordinary high water mark of Horseshoe Lake, where 200 feet is required.
Chairperson Weidt opened the public hearing at 6:35 p.m.
6050 148th Street North, Jerry Philipson — The applicant's husband addressed the Board and
provided his reasoning for support of the variance request.
Chairperson Weidt closed the public hearing at 6:37 p.m.
Arcand made a motion, seconded by Mulvihill, to recommend approval to the City Council of the
variance request from Pamela Oman, located at 6900 170th Street North, to allow a house addition
to be setback 80 feet from the ordinary high water mark of Horseshoe Lake, where 200 feet is
required.
All Ayes. Motion carried.
Adiournment
Arcand made a motion, Mulvihill seconded, to adjourn at 6:39 p.m.
All Ayes. Motion carried.
Respectfully Submitted,
Emily Weber, Community Development Assistant
Agenda Number D.1
CITY OF HUGO COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION
STAFF REPORT
TO: Board of Zoning and Adjustments
FROM: Rachel Juba, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Rosemary Apartments — MWF Properties. Variance from Building
Height Requirements.
DATE: August 16, 2019, for the Board meeting of August 22, 2019
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Medium Density Residential (MD)
ZONING: Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (R-5)
REVIEW DEADLINE: 60 -day Review Waived
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting approval of a variance to allow the apartment building to be 45 feet
and 7 inches tall at the highest point of the building (roof ridge), where 35 feet is required by
ordinance. The building is a three-story apartment with underground parking.
2. BACKGROUND:
On April 15, 2019, the City Council approved a site plan and conditional use permit for
Rosemary Apartments. It is a three-story building with 45 units. The property is located on
Rosemary Way and west of Everton Avenue in the Frenchman Place development. At the time of
site plan approval the building elevation proposed was over 35 feet in height. The developer
stated that the building height is a result of comments from staff on the architecture, but they will
work on reducing the height. Staff agreed that the building height was a result of staff comments.
The developer further stated if they can't meet the building height requirements, they would
apply for a variance. The site plan and building architecture is generally the same as what was
reviewed during the site plan approval process.
Building Code versus Zoning Code
During the review of this variance request staff discovered there is a discrepancy between the
building code and zoning code. The building code defines building height as the height of the
building from average grade to the mid -point of the highest peak. In this case the building height
Page 2
would be 38 feet and 9 inches. The zoning code defines building height as the vertical distance
above mean (average) ground level to the top of a flat roof, or to the highest point on a pitched,
hip or gable roof. In this case the building height is 45 feet and 7 inches. Since the maximum
height requirement is in the zoning code, the applicant has measured the height of the building to
the top of the highest point on the building. The building code does not have a maximum height
requirement.
Three -Story Townhomes
There are three-story townhomes that have been approved and constructed in the City. An
example of these buildings are in the Victor Gardens development. The buildings are 42 feet tall
at their highest peak and 36 feet tall to the mid -point of the highest peak. The buildings are
typically setback 30 feet from the road.
3. LEVEL OF DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING
The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the
proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a
higher level of discretion with a variance because the burden of proof is on the applicant to show
that they meet the standards in the ordinance.
4. CONTEXT:
A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning
The properties to the north are zoned Agricultural (AG) and are occupied by large lots and single
family homes. The property to the east is zoned Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (R-
5) and is occupied by Christ Lutheran Church. The properties to the south are zoned General
Business (C-2) and are vacant. The property to the west is zoned Planned Unit Development
(PUD) is occupied by townhomes.
B. Natural Characteristics of Site
The property is currently vacant and contains several wetlands. The upland of the property was
used for stockpiling of dirt, but is normally generally flat.
5. ANALYSIS:
Variance
Building Height
The R-5 zoning district has a maximum building height of 35 feet. They are proposing the height
of the building to be 45 feet and 7 inches tall, where 35 feet is required by ordinance, therefore a
variance is required.
2
Page 3
Staff used these standards to review the variance request and finds that it meets the standards as
follows:
(1) Law. The variance as requested is permissible by law.
The proposed variance is permissible by law.
(2) Practical Difficulties. The applicant for a variance shall establish that there are practical
difficulties in complying with the provisions of the zoning regulations. The term "Practical
Difficulties " as used in the granting of a variance means:
a. Reasonable Use. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable
manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance and;
The applicant is requesting to construct a three-story apartment with a pitched roof. The
architecture of the building is consistent with the Multi -Family Design Guidelines and
other townhomes developments in the City. The zoning district allows apartments with
approval of a site plan and conditional use permit, which was approved by the City on
April 15, 2019.
The applicant is requesting to use the property in a reasonable manner.
b. Unique Circumstances. The plight of property owner is due to circumstances unique to
the property not created by the landowner and;
The 18 acre property has several wetlands creating approximately 4.5 buildable acres.
The zoning district allows apartment development up to 10 units per acre. The site plan
and general architecture has been approved by the City Council. The property is unique in
that the location of the buildable area and largest area to build is central to the site. The
building will be located over 200 feet away from the street and nearby homes. The impact
of the building being 10 feet taller than what is allowed by ordinance is minimized
because of the location of the building and its proximity to the road and other residential
development.
c. Character o Neighborhood. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood.
The City's Comprehensive Plan guides the land use for the site as Medium Density
Residential (MD). The site is located between a commercial area, large lot residential,
and a townhome development. The property is part of the Frenchman Place development
that was master planned in 2008. There are several lots in the development that were
proposed to be a combination of institutional, residential, and commercial uses.
3
Page 4
The building is also centrally located within the site and will not overshadow existing
buildings and will not noticeably impact the surrounding development. Unlike other
residential developments, the building is further away from adjacent properties and roads.
The building is approximately 200 feet from Rosemary Way and approximately 250 feet
away from the nearest townhome to the west.
The City Multi -Family Design Guidelines have specific design requirements for multi-
family buildings. The applicant has done a good job complying with the design guidelines
and the proposed building is attractive and blends in with the surrounding area. If the
variance is not granted, the building design would change significantly and would likely
result in a flat roof building. The residential developments in this area all have pitched
roofs and staff recommends the proposed building have a pitch roof to be consistent with
the other residential developments in the area.
The apartment building is compatible with the master plan, the surrounding development,
and will not alter the character of the area.
It is in staff's opinion that the applicant has practical difficulties in meeting the zoning
requirement.
(3)S
pirit and Intent. The granting of the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent
of this chapter and with the policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
The spirit and intent of the ordinance is to allow a certain building height without adversely
impacting the character of established areas and ensuring the building is consistent with the
surrounding development. The building is centrally located within the site, further away from
adjacent properties and roads than most other developments, and will not overshadow existing
buildings. The height of the building will not adversely impact the character of the area and will
be consistent with the surrounding development. The granting of the variance will keep with the
spirit and intent of the ordinance.
(4) Prohibited Use. The variance, if granted, shall not have the effect of allowing any use
prohibited in the district.
An apartment is allowed in the Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (R-5) district with
approval of a conditional use permit. The conditional use permit has been approved by the City
Council.
(5) Hazard Consideration. The variance, if granted, shall not permit a lower degree of flood
protection than required by this chapter. The variance shall be determined the minimum
necessary, considering the flood hazard, to afford relief, and the variance shall not be issued
within any designated regulatory floodway if any increase in flood levels during the base flood
discharge would result.
The property is not located within a floodplain designated by FEMA.
(6) Septic and Well Compliance. The sewage treatment system and water system of the subject
2
Page 5
property is in compliance with city and state codes.
The property is served with municipal sewer and water.
It's in staff's opinion that the applicant has met the criteria to approve the variance request.
6. CONCLUSION:
The City Multi -Family Design Guidelines have specific design requirements for multi -family
buildings. The applicant has done a good job complying with the design guidelines and the
proposed building is attractive and blends in with the surrounding area. If the variance is not
granted, the building design would change significantly and would likely result in a flat roof
building. The residential developments in this area all have pitched roofs and staff recommends
the proposed building have a pitch roof to be consistent with the other residential developments
in the area.
The building is centrally located within the site, further away from adjacent properties and roads
than most residential developments. It will not overshadow existing buildings and will not
noticeably change the character of the surrounding development.
Staff finds that the proposal meets all the requirements necessary for the City to approve a
variance as outlined in the City Code, subject to the attached resolution.
7. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the variance for Rosemary Apartments to allow the building to be
45 feet 7 inches, where 35 feet is required by ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
Location Map
2.
Resolution
3.
Applicants Narrative
4.
Site Plan
5.
Building Elevations
5
MIR.
' � a
7'�- �7
JL
RESOLUTION 2019
APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR MWF PROPERTIES FOR AN APARTMENT
BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF ROSEMARY WAY
AND WEST OF EVERTON AVENUE NORTH
WHEREAS, MWF Properties, has requested approval of a variance to allow an
apartment building to be 45 feet and 7 inches, where 35 feet is required by ordinance on
the property legally described as;
Outlot B, Frenchman Place
WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning and Adjustments has reviewed said variance at a duly
called a public hearing on August 22, 2019, and recommends approval subject to the
findings listed in this resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF HUGO, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the
variance for MWF Properties to allow an apartment building to be 45 feet and 7 inches,
where 35 feet is required by ordinance with the following findings:
1. The proposed variance is permissible by law.
2. The applicant is requesting to construct a three-story apartment with a pitched
roof. The architecture of the building is consistent with the Multi -Family Design
Guidelines and other townhomes developments in the City. The zoning district
allowed apartments with approval of a site plan and conditional use permit, which
was approved by the City on April 15, 2019.
3. The 18 acre property has several wetlands creating approximately 4.5 buildable
acres. The zoning district allows apartment development up to 10 units per acre.
The site plan and general architecture has been approved by the City Council. The
property is unique in that the location of the buildable area and largest area to
build is central to the site. The building will be located over 200 feet away from
the street and nearby homes. The impact of the building being 10 feet taller than
what is allowed by ordinance is minimized because of the location of the building
and its proximity to the road and other residential development.
4. The City's Comprehensive Plan guides the land use for the site as Medium
Density Residential (MD). The site is located between a commercial area, large
lot residential, and a townhome development. The property is part of the
Frenchman Place development that was master planned in 2008. There are several
lots in the development that were proposed to be a combination of institutional,
residential, and commercial uses.
5. The building is also centrally located within the site and will not overshadow
existing buildings and will not noticeably impact the surrounding development.
Unlike other residential developments, the building is further away from adjacent
Resolution 2019 -
Page 2
properties and roads. The building is approximately 200 feet from Rosemary Way
and approximately 250 feet away from the nearest townhome to the west.
6. The City Multi -Family Design Guidelines have specific design requirements for
multi -family buildings. The applicant has done a good job complying with the
design guidelines and the proposed building is attractive and blends in with the
surrounding area. If the variance is not granted, the building design would change
significantly and would likely result in a flat roof building. The residential
developments in this area all have pitched roofs and staff recommends the
proposed building have a pitch roof to be consistent with the other residential
developments in the area. The apartment building is compatible with the master
plan, the surrounding development, and will not alter the character of the area.
7. The spirit and intent of the ordinance is to allow a certain building height without
adversely impacting the character of established areas and ensuring the building is
consistent with the surrounding development. The building is centrally located
within the site, further away from adjacent properties and roads than most other
developments, and will not overshadow existing buildings. The height of the
building will not adversely impact the character of the area and will be consistent
with the surrounding development. The granting of the variance will keep with
the spirit and intent of the ordinance.
8. An apartment is allowed in the Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (R-
5) district with approval of a conditional use permit.
9. The property is not located within a floodplain designated by FEMA.
10. The property is served with municipal sewer and water.
Resolution 2019 -
Page 3
ADOPTED by the City Council this Yd day of August, 2019.
Tom Weidt, Mayor
ATTEST:
Michele Lindau, City Clerk
Received by City of Hugo
07.25.19
#19-016
Rosemary Apartments
Variance Narrative
July 25th, 2019
Legal Description:
Outlot B, FRENCHMAN PLACE, 1" Addition
Copies of previous Variances, Site Plan Approvals, Conditional Use Permits, or other permits for the
site:
A conditional use permit and site plan were recommended for approval by the planning commission on
April 4th, 2019 and the City Council on April 15th, 2019.
Description of Variance Requested:
The variance requested is to exceed the R-5 maximum building height of 35 feet as described in Sec 90-
101 of the Hugo City Code. The proposed building height is 35'9 feet from the ground floor elevation to
the midpoint of the roof. This equates to 38'9 height from average grade to the midpoint of the roof or
45'7 from the average grade to the roof ridge.
The proposed elevations submitted with this variance application are approximately 3 feet less than
those submitted with the conditional use permit. These elevations were designed in accordance with
the City of Hugo design standards. The proposed development is consistent with all other City
standards.
How criteria under Sec 90-38, Sub C, 1-6 has been satisfied:
Please see the below findings for approval for the proposed development:
Law. The variance as requested is permissible by law.
Practical difficulties:
1. Reasonable use. The proposal will utilize the property in a reasonable manner that
is consistent with the intent of the ordinance.
2. Unique circumstances. While the property is over 18 acres in total, the significant
number of wetlands on the site reduce the buildable acreage to under 4.8 acres. The shape of the
remaining buildable acreage is results in few building configurations that will remain consistent
with the City's ordinances. Additionally, the 100 year flood elevation requires the building floor
elevation be no lower than 919, higher than it otherwise would be if the flood plane were not a
factor. This results in additional grading challenges, further limiting the options for the site. The
topography, shape, high water table, and wetlands on the site create unique circumstances, at no
fault of the owner, that result in limited site and building configurations for the proposed
development which are contributing factors to the need for the requested variance.
3. Character of neighborhood. The building was designed to be consistent with the
character of the neighborhood.
4. Spirit and intent. The proposed project is consistent with the spirit and intent of the zoning
ordinance and land use designation for the site as outlined in the comprehensive plan.
Prohibited use. The variance, if granted, shall not have the effect of allowing any use prohibited
in the district.
Hazard consideration. The variance, if granted, shall not permit a lower degree of flood
protection than required by this chapter. The variance shall be determined the minimum
necessary, considering the flood hazard, to afford relief, and the variance shall not be issued
within any designated regulatory floodway if any increase in flood levels during the base flood
discharge would result.
Septic and well compliance. The sewage treatment system and water system of the subject
property is in compliance with city and state codes.
W�---
✓� W W W w w w w w w w w� w w w w w __._ �.xx .�E. w--_=-;� � w T� xa. �;sM,z w `� �°� �,�,
.,. W w W y I w .✓ w .✓ w w w w w .✓ WETLA�Dw w w w w w w w w w .✓ w .✓ W W W w w w w w w w w w`De!' w wp�\ w .✓\ N£IWND w w wNw '�/),/3
w w .✓ IWC Y w w W .✓ . w w w .✓ . w w w w w � w w w �°.�✓ � �s§:�sso �,W w w wH�a?� /.✓ E /"+' n�r 9cs.
w w w.l�w ITV W w .✓ W w W w .✓ x.u..✓ W w w �"%�W w w W w .✓ $ze`� �w - w .✓ �
� w� ,�.r� w w w w w w w ���E�IW,9°„m,�,3w w w w w �; �-•-�xo.AE. w w w w w w w w w l l
3 w
I
e3
w wwwwwww j w wwww ANS w w w
,• w
i w w-7,
wgj? AND
��w wr �� ° ��,wwwxs, a w www wwww wwwwwww ww ', wwwwwww��� LOf 2
Www v R� 70 w w w w w w w ww�
.s"W
�2oizi w I
�;(zoIT° w wW �w QNwww wwwww
wwww �w�
\\•=sW�a=° EA���sF
�\ Z
FRENCyMq�
D----------
p4,
LO
/� w urnnrvo/vorvos • io is ,.'°�k�' � g
WETLAND IMPACT TABLE:
WE �ROIMEE«
ASIRA
mre z a ox
n
nRuo my LAREA E is oN•
ARM F W OW MME -ON'
ro Ai -
MTC L E R
NANSON
a r c In I t e c i s
REVISION SUM— A
PROPOSED
o
N
WETLAND IMPACTS
xx
C2.2
CMine
Call eerore yow a�q.
I
Ln
0)
00I
n
ROOF
PEAK
ROOF
MID -SLOPE
927.00
AVERAC
GRADE
TYP.
FB SHAKE SIDING
ASPHALT SHINGLES
HED ROOF PITCH 4.75:12 TYP
AIN ROOF PITCH 4:12 TYP
Irp!`Irp I'oil
■rr,t■rrl �� r N
1■rrl■rel■■■■1■r■1■
IrIlrrllrI I■rrl■rrl■= 1■1 ■r■1■■■1■ 11—LJ
I.r■■.r■■.r■11 I r■ ■.r■■.r■■1
FB SHAKE SIDI
�.■.■� _ .. ♦................... I ......
.r..............-.-, i.■.■.■ — ■■
a'no"�■= 1■...............................u■r■II■ri = ■II
■1■I.::::::::.... ::T ■r■1■roil - ■r
rrll - iunuiwiwn.uwiwnur rllr■Illrl = 111
■1■r■1■r■ - ��----------REIN-r
............... -Irl
1■■1■r■1■I = ..........I .............. 1101000100011
.:........................: N o
r■Ilr■Ilr■1
■■
��■.■.■.■.■.■.1■rrl■rrl■rrl■rrl
.. 1■1■r■1■r■1■r■1■r
_ ■rllrrllrrllrrlll
r.l■ = Irr�lrr�lrr�lrr�.
NO
irinn
r■n■
r■n■
u � I0
■u :lis, u 0
_ ■ - �i - ■ i■iii■iii■iii■iii■r�i■i�i� ■
�_ = ■_ �_ 1 ■ ■ ■ 11 11■r■1■■■lslinglin
■
_� � �0
MIN No■�11 ■,IIIIIIIIIImo.�
FLEjum—ij■-I■IL =■ �UUI;:U ■U III MTLLL
CAST STONE
1 1
❑� IIII •_❑� ❑� ■. � �❑� IIIIIIIIII � �
I N EE'E l mmE-9-0
UIQ
������■ f �■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I-
^... TT��-� �������� 1 ■'REIN-�r�1-�.r.. ■�����������..
ROCK FACE CMU CFB LAP SIDING 1 VINYL WINDOWS
CFB LAP SIDING 2
CAST STONE CFB LAP SIDING 1
CFB LAP SIDING 2
SOUTHWEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION
1/89 - 1'-0•
FB SHAKE SIDIN
FB SHAKE SIDIN
CFB SHAKE SIDIN
ASPHALT SHING
+Irr�irr�irr��■�+'rr�irr�irr�■ j+r�irr�l■ j+j I�r�—tit—�r■rel I�� 1 � � � 1�"1'1
I■■ ■1■■ ■1■I■1■r 11 I■1■11
Illl ■r,pl ■rlgl ■rNI llll
❑ — rl■I.. i■rI■I11HE110-mol-imm'111.1'fi
.l■r■I . . ■ ❑ ■ l■r■
■r ■1■r Blow Ino
M ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■ Ir ■ ■ ■ III
ogm
I111111111��11111111I111111
ME
i�
em
REIN---.-:........�- ....■...r-� ■H —
��
METAL ROOFING CAST STONE
ROCK FACE CMU ROCK FACE CMU
--------------- ON
---------- ---REIN -----------------------------------------------------------------REIN--REIN . . 1----------------------------REIN--REIN . 1 . 1 .--------------------------------------------
--------- --------. 1 ■ 1 ----
5i■1■.I.t■■t■tt■tt■t■■..1■t■.1 FAIR■R �ptl'uuu.uuuuuuuuuuuuuni....unun.uuuum.uuu..... mnuwum ■ \ um.....I....uuuuu..... uuv ■ ■ 1 ■ ■ ■� vunun.uuuum.uuuum.unumnuu.umnun........I .■ ■ ■ v.0
■-■-■-���-.i■�■�■■■■■■■■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■■i■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.. Ir■ _ ■11� �■.■.■.■...■.■.■.■.■� �lr■Il■ - ■■Ilrll. ��.■.■.■.■�■.■.■.■.■.■.�.■.■...■.■.■.■.. �rrllrl - ■1. �i
._�t■..t■.t.t■...�.■................................................................... — — _ -
.iiniiniiir'�g�\tom.\til\ts.\t�.\t�t\t�.\t�.\t�t\t�g►� mmmuummm�umnumu.unumuuuummuuummnumnuu..� ■111 = �1■r�l► iiniiuiniiniuuuuiniuuiiui� ,�rrl■r■11 = I■r�l■1� �niini...... iii�iiiniiiniiiiniiimiuin..... iniiiniinin� .�I■r■1■ = r�l■r�� u
iiii� —.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■ _ �.■. ■. ■... ■. ■.■.■.. �■.■.■.■.. ...■.■.■.■.■.■.■...■.■.■.■r
■� M r r r r r r r r r = r r
.i im■.■■....................■...........■.■..■...■.■..■■..■.■■.■■..■-' II■ 111 — ■ ■1■ ■\ II■ ■1■ 1 — ■1■ ■,■ \ dr, ■1■ ■ — ■ ■1■
.-.. . mu■.mwm ............................ u. .. .u..■.u■u.uu.nnu.uu.n.■v Millis = 1 . 1 . i---- ----------i ■ l . l = . l V l pin..... ..11 ..... ............... i• I l I
.— Ir Ir 1 ■ Ir 1■_■ Ir Ir. �Ir Ir _ Ir Ir
' --'.■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■..■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.■■.. II■r■1■ ■ ■ for■1■r■11 - I■rel■rel■1,,..■.■■.■■■.■.■I.■■.u■u■u....u■u....u■u.. II■rsl■r■1■ - �1■rI■1■r►
nnnnnmm�nnnnn
.._.: 1■161■1■1■1■1 ■uuu ....uumumowuumuu vunummum�uwwuuwwuumuuumwm.r u
:..:...:...:...:...:. ■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■ ■I■r■1 - ■1■r■loll = ■1■r■1■r■Il ii �.■.■.■.■.� r■lor■1o■■
I I �rr�lrl�lrr�l �_ REIN I •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ■Illrr 1 ■Ilrrllr__-Jrllrrllrrl ••• ••••••••••••••• rllrrllr =
.................................................
.............::.NNNN1�
■1■r �!-.■.■.■.■����.■.■■1■1■1■1■rI■1■rI■1■rI■1■rl.■.■.■.■���,
r ■1■r■1■r■1■1NIEWMIN11 r■1■r■1■r■Ir ...........
■ _II. '■.■ ■Irrll■llll IIlrr■r1■lllI rr■i■n�Ign■=1
❑I■❑I■—I— ❑I■_I ❑I■_I rrl■lr1■rrl■l ❑I■_I I-I❑L■ ❑I■_I llII ❑I■-I❑�■��
i1■■I■r■iIrrl■Ilierll►■rrll<i■,■■■ri1rr�■Ilirllirrrlli■ll ❑■ ❑■ 6`01
ling
rI■r ❑■IrIlrrl■1■ 1■r■ ■1■1■ll
rg■r rio■rf
■ ■. i. .l■■1■1
RE,
■ 111"'m
I'm M uulinelI
❑Iu■—
I
1
Floor 1■■■1■ r■1■ri1■■■1 ■1■r■1■rrl■rrl■r■1 l■1■r■1■I 11■1�1
■■■I■■ ■■I■r■ 1■r■I■I ■ I l■I■l■ ■I ■1 ■r■1■0 ■■1 Ir■1■r■
• Igrrrgrrllrrllrrllrrlgrll - rill rllrrllrr • oil 21
■ ■1■1■1■1■1■1■1■1■1■1■1■r Igrl■rI■1■rl■rIn l■rrl■r■II■r■II■r■II■r
Il■1■l■1■l■1■r■1■l■1■l■1■ ■r■1■r■1■r■1■r■1■r■1■r■Ir Ir■1■r■1■r■1■r■1■l■1■l■1■i
� Ilrrllrrllrrllrrllrrllrll Ilrrllrrllrrllrrllrrllrrl � Irrllrrllrrllrrlgrrlgrrll
■ ■1■r■1■IMI■rlrl■rrtl■rrtl■ �l■rI■1■r ■rl■1■rl■1■rl■1■rl ■ rl■rrl■r r■1■rrtl■r■1■1■
1■■I■r■1 ■r■1■r■ 11 Ir■1■r■ ■
Ilrrllr0 Ilrrll 11 lrrllr 11
■ ■ ■❑■ = __❑�❑�=_�_❑� ❑� '°III ;❑�❑� JIM;�;;❑�❑� �_❑�❑� ❑�:
■ ■ ■ I■LI = U U ; IBJ ILI■ WIN; ; UL LII■ ]I= IN
MEN■ ��� 1 I t ■ II -_II 1 ■ � ■
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ I uu �� �: �I Us 1 ERIC ■ IS I �' ��: : I�
■I:.I■:� ■■■■■■■■■■1■■■■■1■1■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�■■■ 1 1 ■■■■■■■■'M■■. =11 p
REIN ��REIN �IN--—
CFB LAP SIDING 1
CFB LAP SIDING 2
0 4' 8' 16'
MAIN ROOF PITCH 4:12 TYP
SHED ROOF PITCH 4.75:12 TYP
CFB SHAKE SIDING
ASPHALT SHINGLES-----,_,
Iriill ■ ■in — �� ��
rll
r■ — l■rel■■■1■r■1■■r
I r■I■r■I■r■I■r■I■
e
r■I■r■I■r u
� 1
1
noon■■■ l
SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION
1/8• - 111
0 4' 8' 16'
ROOF
PEAK
ROOF
MID -SLOPE
ISSUE & REVISION
PROGRESS SET: 11/26/18
CITY SUMISSION : 02/15/19
MHFA : 05/28/19
COMM #1809
Z
z
a i
—ice REIN �
�
REIN --REIN � �
-
- ROCK FACE CMU CFB
LAP SIDING 1
CAST STONE VINYL WINDOWS
CFB LAP SIDING 1 ROCK FACE CMU CAST STONE--'
5
LnU
4
CFB LAP SIDING 2
SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION
1/8• - 111
0 4' 8' 16'
ROOF
PEAK
ROOF
MID -SLOPE
ISSUE & REVISION
PROGRESS SET: 11/26/18
CITY SUMISSION : 02/15/19
MHFA : 05/28/19
COMM #1809
CL
Z
z
a i
� oYC o
Z
O1L a o
H
a
ro 0 IQ
5
LnU
4
>a 711 m
J
ciI*(Agn1AH
W�
Z
E0
a �
O� YC
0co
ii
¢ O
N
C9 :5 RIC o
Lu N
0
MOLo N
w
�'3NOmW
a
J r m J r
J
>
..
?W5U)m
cc 2
Ua mNIOF-
CL
L
T
z
3N m
c
CD o 3
>+ Z
Z
Z
Q
W
5
LnU
L
>
o
W�
m
c
E0
c
O
c
-
�
0
w
+r
O W
oa
a
��
cc 2
Er
Q
L
T
z
3N m
c
CD o 3
Z
to
m
10
LnU
>
o
a
m
c
00
c
O
c
-
�
0
w
+r
O W
S 0
t O ��
t
� Gs
CD
O F M
CO
0 U¢
927.00 �L E1o" z
5 W w w
AVERAGE W � W Z
GRADE z> LL
TYP. < J � W O
W < W
0 ¢ Q Z
O l W CD
z M:
IiWDO z Z
Zg Y D
` U¢OW
T U) M:
F
W0WW W
W d d 0
=Wcxnz Z ❑
z
2
J
W
LL 02019 Miller Hanson Architects
z
3N m
c
CD o 3
O
� � � � 3
co m 3
LnU
�O V
00
U
°
CD
O F M
CO
0 U¢
927.00 �L E1o" z
5 W w w
AVERAGE W � W Z
GRADE z> LL
TYP. < J � W O
W < W
0 ¢ Q Z
O l W CD
z M:
IiWDO z Z
Zg Y D
` U¢OW
T U) M:
F
W0WW W
W d d 0
=Wcxnz Z ❑
z
2
J
W
LL 02019 Miller Hanson Architects
uuu..uuuuu..w■uw
no
3 �R�EAS�TE�X TERIOF
111 - 1'-0•
-ASPHALT SHINGLES
CFR SHAKF SIDING --
Na ' • -
wilawal
.:
�:............��_ .......................
a I glum I Anil am I Iowa I a oil am I lava.
mommmumommmummm
as
.:.�Am M...9. �.���. �•�:G.7 .:'
................:.......:...:.......:...:.......:...:.....,�...
via .11..a1..Ala
....:ai5...
.............................1...............■_ .............
.:::7 ...:::::7.:::::7 :::7 ..:::'.:7 ...:::7 .... ,7 ..:
.....................
.......... ..... ....... ..................... ............ .,,.......... I...... N.A......... a........11 .:.:. �. �. �. �.�■
........................... AI .................... - .........................
::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::.:::. I .::.;::1;::1;::1;::1;::.:::.;::.;:::IMMMMMMS OEM OEM MEN MEN MEN MEN on
.............................................................. - 1111. ■........ ■ ■.. ■ ■.. ■ ■... ■... ■... ■1111..
..............................................................................
■__■.■.■...■.■...■.■...■.,�...■.....■.■-.=------- --------------------------
.■..■.....■.■■■.■.....■.■■..■.....■..■.....laO1■■.......■..■1111..
■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■.■..■.■.■.■.■.■.■---
....................................11..........................
■..�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�:.....■.....■..■..■............................
■,IlrCl oil oil.,l l.,l
r1..rr..rr..rr
i�r001fiil i1ri r ii
nm■ u
■ r�lw�l■r ■ rlrn I ■ .
I_II-I l■r■l■r■ll l■r■
IJIJ arlrlrlrlll_II_I Ir` IIID 1-
l■r■l■r■lr ��II�I
Ilr,llr,l
rlrl■rlrl■r
l■r■l■r■l■
1 1
1 _ 1
N—��-1 uuuOMFELE
=;
jF0_1_.m�0
ii1�I
1■.�_■ I-
��I
■.■.■.■.■.........■.■...■.■.■.■./
.........................................Aim.........
.■.■.................■....■i. .■
.■u■........o.......o.u.u.u.u.u.auu. un
3=
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
I
1
I1
I
II
1
1
1
1151.. Z
11 -
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
01 no
IRAN—
IRANIAN
ANN
■s also uumunuu. _
_............................._ �......
.■.u■. gas also also .u■..■■■.■■■.■■■.■■■.■■u.-.......
Nom
c fi..................................... I,
r...r...r...r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.ri� :�:
liz
'�\■■■■■■■■■■■■I,I
01]:
I
:1101:
_more
11