PC Staff Report 07-06-21PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF
REPORT
Tuesday,July 6,2021
Subject Consider a Request for Variances to Construct a Deck and Retaining Wall within the Bluff
Setback and Bluff Impact Zone on Property located at 6609 Horseshoe Curve
Section PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No:B.1.
Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,Associate
Planner
File No:Planning Case No.2021-07
PROPOSED MOTION:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 20-foot bluff impact zone and 30-foot bluff
setback variance for the construction of a deck and a bluff impact zone and bluff setback variance for the
construction of retaining walls within the bluff,subject to the Conditions of Approval,and adopts the attached
Findings of Fact and Decision.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant is requesting that the City allow them to extend the deck approved during the January 19,2021 Planning
Commission meeting an additional two feet into the bluff setback.As part of this redesign they are also proposing
replacing a previously approved concrete retaining wall and concrete window well pad located within the bluff setback
and impact zone with a living wall system similar to the one previously approved to replace the property’s southern
retaining wall.The applicant’s submittal also includes a revised driveway configuration which increases the property’s
lot cover beyond what was shown in the January 19,2021,though the resulting lot cover still remains under the
district's 25 percent lot cover limit.Changes to the walkway providing access to the lake are also proposed although all
of these are allowed by City Code and do not factor into the requested variances.Finally,the applicant initially
proposed replacing the property’s existing equipment pad and associated retaining wall with a 9-foot by 9-foot
maintenance area and associated retaining wall extending into the bluff however,after consultation with staff they
agreed to revise their plans to stay within the existing area of encroachment.
The applicant has stated that the revised deck configuration is necessary to accommodate foot traffic using the staircase
to travel from the front of the property to the lake.They note that the approved 12-foot deck width does not provide
adequate space for furniture and a walkway and that the 12-foot deck width had been selected when the proposed
deck was to of an impervious rather than pervious design with the goal of minimizing impervious surface,a concern that
no long applies.They feel that there are potential safety risks caused by the narrow walking space provided by a 12-
foot wide deck and that the two-foot increase would simply cover exposed ground while not requiring any new grading
or footings which could negatively impact the bluff.
Regarding the proposed change to the western retaining wall and window well,the applicant notes that replacing a
concrete retaining wall with a living wall system will allow for greater infiltration of stormwater and also removes lot
PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREPORTTuesday,July 6,2021SubjectConsider a Request for Variances to Construct a Deck and Retaining Wall within theBluffSetbackandBluffImpactZoneonPropertylocatedat6609HorseshoeCurveSectionPUBLICHEARINGSItemNo:B.1.Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,AssociatePlanner File No:Planning Case No.2021-07PROPOSEDMOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 20-foot bluff impact zone and 30-footbluffsetbackvariancefortheconstructionofadeckandabluffimpactzoneandbluffsetbackvariancefortheconstructionofretainingwallswithinthebluff,subject to the Conditions of Approval,and adopts theattachedFindingsofFactandDecision.SUMMARY OFREQUESTTheapplicantisrequestingthat the City allow them to extend the deck approved during the January 19,2021PlanningCommissionmeetinganadditionaltwofeetintothebluffsetback.As part of this redesign they are alsoproposingreplacingapreviouslyapprovedconcreteretainingwallandconcretewindowwellpadlocatedwithinthe bluffsetbackandimpactzonewithalivingwallsystemsimilartotheonepreviouslyapprovedtoreplacetheproperty’ssouthernretainingwall.The applicant’s submittal also includes a revised driveway configuration which increases the property’slotcoverbeyondwhatwasshownintheJanuary19,2021,though the resulting lot cover still remains underthedistrict's 25 percent lot cover limit.Changes to the walkway providing access to the lake are also proposed althoughalloftheseareallowedbyCityCodeanddonotfactorintotherequestedvariances.Finally,the applicantinitiallyproposedreplacingtheproperty’s existing equipment pad and associated retaining wall with a 9-foot by 9-footmaintenanceareaandassociatedretainingwallextendingintothebluffhowever,after consultation with stafftheyagreedtorevisetheirplanstostaywithintheexistingareaofencroachment.The applicant has stated that the revised deck configuration is necessary to accommodate foot traffic using thestaircasetotravelfromthefrontofthepropertytothelake.They note that the approved 12-foot deck width does notprovideadequatespaceforfurnitureandawalkwayandthatthe12-foot deck width had been selected when theproposeddeckwastoofanimperviousratherthanperviousdesignwiththegoalofminimizingimpervioussurface,a concernthatnolongapplies.They feel that there are potential safety risks caused by the narrow walking space provided by a 12-foot wide deck and that the two-foot increase would simply cover exposed ground while not requiring any newgradingorfootingswhichcouldnegativelyimpactthebluff.
Regarding the proposed change to the western retaining wall and window well,the applicant notes that replacing a
concrete retaining wall with a living wall system will allow for greater infiltration of stormwater and also removes lot
cover that would otherwise be located within the bluff impact zone.Since the proposed living wall would cross the top
of the bluff and extend further into the bluff than the previously approved concrete retaining wall,a variance is required
for this retaining wall.
Finally,the applicant has noted that the proposed driveway reconfiguration is needed to lessen the driveway’s grade a
change that will provide safer access in winter and create a larger area for vehicles to turn around.While this change
does increase the property’s lot cover beyond what had been proposed in January,they have noted that it still reduces
the property’s lot cover from the amount shown in the pre-existing conditions survey.They have also stated that the
revised configuration allows the driveway to line up with the proposed stair system providing access to the lake.
By way of background,the applicant has reminded staff that larger more significant encroachments,i.e.a rear bump
out,above-grade deck,and patio,were present in the area where they are requesting a variance to install an at-grade
deck prior to a 2018 remodel where these features were removed.They have noted the removal of the previous
features have left the rear area behind the house as an area of dirt and weeds,without any improved area near the rear
patio door,and that the approved deck does not fully cover this area.
The applicant has stated that in 2020,boulders from the failing walls came loose and rolled down the hill causing
damage to their property.They have stated that if they are not permitted to reconstruct the property’s remaining
boulder walls,they believe further erosion and damage will occur.Finally,they have noted that a living wall system was
already approved to replace the southern wall and that they believe that using that same system to replace the western
retaining wall would achieve better outcomes.
Staff recognizes that the applicant has provide a thoughtful proposal that does its utmost to balance the owners’needs
with minimizing the impact to the bluff and lake.Furthermore,if the applicant had proposed the deck as part of the
initial remodel,a substantial portion of it could have been approved without a variance as a reduction to an existing
nonconformity.Additionally,the condition of the existing retaining walls does require action and the applicant’s
proposed living wall solution is designed to address the safety and erosion concerns in a way that improves the bluff
relative to the existing conditions.
The City is typically hesitant to support variances allowing for an expansion of a previously issued variance however,in
this case,the City feels that so long as the deck expansion is confined to the area previously degraded by the pre-
existing features and their removal and does not require any regrading of the bluff,the difference in the impact between
a 12-foot wide and 14-foot wide deck is negligible.Additionally,staff believes that the proposed reconfiguration of the
window well area is a net improvement on the original plan.Finally,while staff would prefer not to see the driveway’s
impervious surface increase,if it came in as a separate permit,staff would likely approve the permit as it would still
result in an impervious surface coverage under what is allowed by Code and less than what was previously present.
Staff is also sympathetic to the applicants desire to do everything possible to minimize the slope on what is an
extremely steep driveway,and while the overall slope of the driveway remains at 19%,the reconfiguration does lessen
the slope on the lower section of the driveway.For these reasons,staff is recommending approval of the variance
requests.
APPLICANT
Brian T.and Elise R.Bruner,6609 Horseshoe Curve,Chanhassen,MN 55317
SITE INFORMATION
PRESENT ZONING:RSF”Single-Family Residential District
LAND USE:Residential Low Density
ACREAGE:64 acres
DENSITY:NA
APPLICATION REGULATIONS
PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREPORTTuesday,July 6,2021SubjectConsider a Request for Variances to Construct a Deck and Retaining Wall within theBluffSetbackandBluffImpactZoneonPropertylocatedat6609HorseshoeCurveSectionPUBLICHEARINGSItemNo:B.1.Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,AssociatePlanner File No:Planning Case No.2021-07PROPOSEDMOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 20-foot bluff impact zone and 30-footbluffsetbackvariancefortheconstructionofadeckandabluffimpactzoneandbluffsetbackvariancefortheconstructionofretainingwallswithinthebluff,subject to the Conditions of Approval,and adopts theattachedFindingsofFactandDecision.SUMMARY OFREQUESTTheapplicantisrequestingthat the City allow them to extend the deck approved during the January 19,2021PlanningCommissionmeetinganadditionaltwofeetintothebluffsetback.As part of this redesign they are alsoproposingreplacingapreviouslyapprovedconcreteretainingwallandconcretewindowwellpadlocatedwithinthe bluffsetbackandimpactzonewithalivingwallsystemsimilartotheonepreviouslyapprovedtoreplacetheproperty’ssouthernretainingwall.The applicant’s submittal also includes a revised driveway configuration which increases the property’slotcoverbeyondwhatwasshownintheJanuary19,2021,though the resulting lot cover still remains underthedistrict's 25 percent lot cover limit.Changes to the walkway providing access to the lake are also proposed althoughalloftheseareallowedbyCityCodeanddonotfactorintotherequestedvariances.Finally,the applicantinitiallyproposedreplacingtheproperty’s existing equipment pad and associated retaining wall with a 9-foot by 9-footmaintenanceareaandassociatedretainingwallextendingintothebluffhowever,after consultation with stafftheyagreedtorevisetheirplanstostaywithintheexistingareaofencroachment.The applicant has stated that the revised deck configuration is necessary to accommodate foot traffic using thestaircasetotravelfromthefrontofthepropertytothelake.They note that the approved 12-foot deck width does notprovideadequatespaceforfurnitureandawalkwayandthatthe12-foot deck width had been selected when theproposeddeckwastoofanimperviousratherthanperviousdesignwiththegoalofminimizingimpervioussurface,a concernthatnolongapplies.They feel that there are potential safety risks caused by the narrow walking space provided by a 12-foot wide deck and that the two-foot increase would simply cover exposed ground while not requiring any newgradingorfootingswhichcouldnegativelyimpactthebluff.Regarding the proposed change to the western retaining wall and window well,the applicant notes that replacingaconcreteretainingwallwithalivingwallsystemwillallowforgreaterinfiltrationofstormwaterandalsoremoveslotcoverthatwouldotherwisebelocatedwithinthebluffimpactzone.Since the proposed living wall would cross thetopofthebluffandextendfurtherintothebluffthanthepreviouslyapprovedconcreteretainingwall,a variance isrequiredforthisretainingwall.Finally,the applicant has noted that the proposed driveway reconfiguration is needed to lessen the driveway’s gradeachangethatwillprovidesaferaccessinwinterandcreatealargerareaforvehiclestoturnaround.While thischangedoesincreasetheproperty’s lot cover beyond what had been proposed in January,they have noted that it stillreducestheproperty’s lot cover from the amount shown in the pre-existing conditions survey.They have also stated thattherevisedconfigurationallowsthedrivewaytolineupwiththeproposedstairsystemprovidingaccesstothelake.By way of background,the applicant has reminded staff that larger more significant encroachments,i.e.a rearbumpout,above-grade deck,and patio,were present in the area where they are requesting a variance to install an at-gradedeckpriortoa2018remodelwherethesefeatureswereremoved.They have noted the removal of thepreviousfeatureshavelefttherearareabehindthehouseasanareaofdirtandweeds,without any improved area near therearpatiodoor,and that the approved deck does not fully cover this area.The applicant has stated that in 2020,boulders from the failing walls came loose and rolled down the hillcausingdamagetotheirproperty.They have stated that if they are not permitted to reconstruct the property’sremainingboulderwalls,they believe further erosion and damage will occur.Finally,they have noted that a living wall systemwasalreadyapprovedtoreplacethesouthernwallandthattheybelievethatusingthatsamesystemtoreplacethewesternretainingwallwouldachievebetteroutcomes.Staff recognizes that the applicant has provide a thoughtful proposal that does its utmost to balance the owners’needswithminimizingtheimpacttothebluffandlake.Furthermore,if the applicant had proposed the deck as part oftheinitialremodel,a substantial portion of it could have been approved without a variance as a reduction to anexistingnonconformity.Additionally,the condition of the existing retaining walls does require action and the applicant’sproposedlivingwallsolutionisdesignedtoaddressthesafetyanderosionconcernsinawaythatimproves thebluffrelativetotheexistingconditions.The City is typically hesitant to support variances allowing for an expansion of a previously issued variance however,inthiscase,the City feels that so long as the deck expansion is confined to the area previously degraded by the pre-existing features and their removal and does not require any regrading of the bluff,the difference in the impactbetweena12-foot wide and 14-foot wide deck is negligible.Additionally,staff believes that the proposed reconfiguration ofthewindowwellareaisanetimprovementontheoriginalplan.Finally,while staff would prefer not to see the driveway’simpervioussurfaceincrease,if it came in as a separate permit,staff would likely approve the permit as it wouldstillresultinanimpervioussurfacecoverageunderwhatisallowedbyCodeandlessthanwhatwaspreviouslypresent.Staff is also sympathetic to the applicants desire to do everything possible to minimize the slope on what isanextremelysteepdriveway,and while the overall slope of the driveway remains at 19%,the reconfiguration doeslessentheslopeonthelowersectionofthedriveway.For these reasons,staff is recommending approval of thevariancerequests.APPLICANTBrianT.and Elise R.Bruner,6609 Horseshoe Curve,Chanhassen,MN55317SITEINFORMATIONPRESENTZONING:RSF”Single-Family ResidentialDistrictLANDUSE:Residential LowDensityACREAGE:64 acresDENSITY:NA
APPLICATION REGULATIONS
Chapter 1,Section 1-2,Rules of Construction and Definitions
Chapter 20,Article II,Division 3.Variances
Chapter 20,Article II,Division 4.Nonconforming Uses
Chapter 20,Article VII.Shoreland Management District
Chapter 20,Article XII,RSF”Single-Family Residential District
Section 20-615,Lot Requirements and Setbacks
Chapter 20,Article XXVIII,Bluff Protection
BACKGROUND
General History
In April of 1999,the City approved a two-lot subdivision with variances allowing for a 20%driveway grade and 81-foot
shoreland setback.*
Note:At the time this subdivision was proposed,the ordinance required structures maintain the shoreland setbacks of the
adjacent properties.This requirement was subsequently repealed and properties are subjected to the current 75-foot
shoreland setback.
In July of 1999,the City issued a building permit for the construction of a single-family home.
In March of 2000,the City issued a building permit to add a deck.
In November of 2018,the City issued a building permit for a significant remodel which include the demolition of the existing
deck and patio.
In June of 2020,the City issued a building permit to add a rooftop deck.
In April of 2021,the applicant applied for a building permit in compliance with Variance 2021-07.
Several permits for interior work and maintenance are also on file with the City.
Variance 2021-07 History
On May 21,2020,the designer contacted staff with a proposal for the site that included a large concrete patio off the rear
of the home,a concrete patio and large water-oriented accessory structure WOAS)near the lake,and front yard parking
pad.
On May 22,2020,staff expressed concerns about the likely presence of a bluff on the property and provided the designer
with the sections of the City Code that they believed would apply to the proposal.Staff indicated that the proposal would
require multiple variances,and that a survey would be required to determine the exact nature and extent of the variances.
On June 16,2020,the designer sent a revised plan and requested a meeting with staff to discuss potential variances.
On June 18,2020,staff met with the applicant’s designer to discuss the proposed project.During the meeting staff
expressed concern regarding the proposed size and placement of the WOAS,proposed front yard parking,and presence
of impervious surface within the bluff impact zone.
On July 16,2020,staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project.During the meeting staff expressed concern
regarding the proposed size and placement of the WOAS,but was supportive of the plans to stabilize the bluff and
proposed pervious patio above the bluff.
On November 20,2020,staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project.The proposed WOAS had been
scaled back to address staff’s concerns.
PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREPORTTuesday,July 6,2021SubjectConsider a Request for Variances to Construct a Deck and Retaining Wall within theBluffSetbackandBluffImpactZoneonPropertylocatedat6609HorseshoeCurveSectionPUBLICHEARINGSItemNo:B.1.Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,AssociatePlanner File No:Planning Case No.2021-07PROPOSEDMOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 20-foot bluff impact zone and 30-footbluffsetbackvariancefortheconstructionofadeckandabluffimpactzoneandbluffsetbackvariancefortheconstructionofretainingwallswithinthebluff,subject to the Conditions of Approval,and adopts theattachedFindingsofFactandDecision.SUMMARY OFREQUESTTheapplicantisrequestingthat the City allow them to extend the deck approved during the January 19,2021PlanningCommissionmeetinganadditionaltwofeetintothebluffsetback.As part of this redesign they are alsoproposingreplacingapreviouslyapprovedconcreteretainingwallandconcretewindowwellpadlocatedwithinthe bluffsetbackandimpactzonewithalivingwallsystemsimilartotheonepreviouslyapprovedtoreplacetheproperty’ssouthernretainingwall.The applicant’s submittal also includes a revised driveway configuration which increases the property’slotcoverbeyondwhatwasshownintheJanuary19,2021,though the resulting lot cover still remains underthedistrict's 25 percent lot cover limit.Changes to the walkway providing access to the lake are also proposed althoughalloftheseareallowedbyCityCodeanddonotfactorintotherequestedvariances.Finally,the applicantinitiallyproposedreplacingtheproperty’s existing equipment pad and associated retaining wall with a 9-foot by 9-footmaintenanceareaandassociatedretainingwallextendingintothebluffhowever,after consultation with stafftheyagreedtorevisetheirplanstostaywithintheexistingareaofencroachment.The applicant has stated that the revised deck configuration is necessary to accommodate foot traffic using thestaircasetotravelfromthefrontofthepropertytothelake.They note that the approved 12-foot deck width does notprovideadequatespaceforfurnitureandawalkwayandthatthe12-foot deck width had been selected when theproposeddeckwastoofanimperviousratherthanperviousdesignwiththegoalofminimizingimpervioussurface,a concernthatnolongapplies.They feel that there are potential safety risks caused by the narrow walking space provided by a 12-foot wide deck and that the two-foot increase would simply cover exposed ground while not requiring any newgradingorfootingswhichcouldnegativelyimpactthebluff.Regarding the proposed change to the western retaining wall and window well,the applicant notes that replacingaconcreteretainingwallwithalivingwallsystemwillallowforgreaterinfiltrationofstormwaterandalsoremoveslotcoverthatwouldotherwisebelocatedwithinthebluffimpactzone.Since the proposed living wall would cross thetopofthebluffandextendfurtherintothebluffthanthepreviouslyapprovedconcreteretainingwall,a variance isrequiredforthisretainingwall.Finally,the applicant has noted that the proposed driveway reconfiguration is needed to lessen the driveway’s gradeachangethatwillprovidesaferaccessinwinterandcreatealargerareaforvehiclestoturnaround.While thischangedoesincreasetheproperty’s lot cover beyond what had been proposed in January,they have noted that it stillreducestheproperty’s lot cover from the amount shown in the pre-existing conditions survey.They have also stated thattherevisedconfigurationallowsthedrivewaytolineupwiththeproposedstairsystemprovidingaccesstothelake.By way of background,the applicant has reminded staff that larger more significant encroachments,i.e.a rearbumpout,above-grade deck,and patio,were present in the area where they are requesting a variance to install an at-gradedeckpriortoa2018remodelwherethesefeatureswere removed.They have noted the removal of thepreviousfeatureshavelefttherearareabehindthehouseasanareaofdirtandweeds,without any improved area near therearpatiodoor,and that the approved deck does not fully cover this area.The applicant has stated that in 2020,boulders from the failing walls came loose and rolled down the hillcausingdamagetotheirproperty.They have stated that if they are not permitted to reconstruct the property’sremainingboulderwalls,they believe further erosion and damage will occur.Finally,they have noted that a living wall systemwasalreadyapprovedtoreplacethesouthernwallandthattheybelievethatusingthatsamesystemtoreplacethewesternretainingwallwouldachievebetteroutcomes.Staff recognizes that the applicant has provide a thoughtful proposal that does its utmost to balance the owners’needswithminimizingtheimpacttothebluffandlake.Furthermore,if the applicant had proposed the deck as part oftheinitialremodel,a substantial portion of it could have been approved without a variance as a reduction to anexistingnonconformity.Additionally,the condition of the existing retaining walls does require action and the applicant’sproposedlivingwallsolutionisdesignedtoaddressthesafetyanderosionconcernsinawaythatimproves thebluffrelativetotheexistingconditions.The City is typically hesitant to support variances allowing for an expansion of a previously issued variance however,inthiscase,the City feels that so long as the deck expansion is confined to the area previously degraded by the pre-existing features and their removal and does not require any regrading of the bluff,the difference in the impactbetweena12-foot wide and 14-foot wide deck is negligible.Additionally,staff believes that the proposed reconfiguration ofthewindowwellareaisanetimprovementontheoriginalplan.Finally,while staff would prefer not to see the driveway’simpervioussurfaceincrease,if it came in as a separate permit,staff would likely approve the permit as it wouldstillresultinanimpervioussurfacecoverageunderwhatisallowedbyCodeandlessthanwhatwaspreviouslypresent.Staff is also sympathetic to the applicants desire to do everything possible to minimize the slope on what isanextremelysteepdriveway,and while the overall slope of the driveway remains at 19%,the reconfiguration doeslessentheslopeonthelowersectionofthedriveway.For these reasons,staff is recommending approval of thevariancerequests.APPLICANTBrianT.and Elise R.Bruner,6609 Horseshoe Curve,Chanhassen,MN55317SITEINFORMATIONPRESENTZONING:RSF”Single-Family ResidentialDistrictLANDUSE:Residential LowDensityACREAGE:64 acresDENSITY:NAAPPLICATIONREGULATIONSChapter1,Section 1-2,Rules of Construction andDefinitionsChapter20,Article II,Division 3.VariancesChapter20,Article II,Division 4.NonconformingUsesChapter20,Article VII.Shoreland ManagementDistrictChapter20,Article XII,RSF”Single-Family ResidentialDistrictSection20-615,Lot Requirements andSetbacksChapter20,Article XXVIII,BluffProtectionBACKGROUNDGeneralHistoryInAprilof1999,the City approved a two-lot subdivision with variances allowing for a 20%driveway grade and 81-footshorelandsetback.**Note:At the time this subdivision was proposed,the ordinance required structures maintain the shoreland setbacks oftheadjacentproperties.This requirement was subsequently repealed and properties are subjected to the current 75-footshorelandsetback.In July of 1999,the City issued a building permit for the construction of a single-family home.In March of 2000,the City issued a building permit to add a deck.In November of 2018,the City issued a building permit for a significant remodel which include the demolition of theexistingdeckandpatio.In June of 2020,the City issued a building permit to add a rooftop deck.In April of 2021,the applicant applied for a building permit in compliance with Variance 2021-07.Several permits for interior work and maintenance are also on file with the City.Variance 2021-07HistoryOnMay21,2020,the designer contacted staff with a proposal for the site that included a large concrete patio off therearofthehome,a concrete patio and large water-oriented accessory structure WOAS)near the lake,and front yardparkingpad.On May 22,2020,staff expressed concerns about the likely presence of a bluff on the property and provided thedesignerwiththesectionsoftheCityCodethattheybelievedwouldapplytotheproposal.Staff indicated that the proposalwouldrequiremultiplevariances,and that a survey would be required to determine the exact nature and extent of the variances.On June 16,2020,the designer sent a revised plan and requested a meeting with staff to discuss potential variances.On June 18,2020,staff met with the applicant’s designer to discuss the proposed project.During the meetingstaffexpressedconcernregardingtheproposedsizeandplacementoftheWOAS,proposed front yard parking,andpresenceofimpervioussurfacewithinthebluffimpactzone.On July 16,2020,staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project.During the meeting staff expressedconcernregardingtheproposedsizeandplacementoftheWOAS,but was supportive of the plans to stabilize the bluffandproposedperviouspatioabovethebluff.
On November 20,2020,staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project.The proposed WOAS had been
scaled back to address staff’s concerns.
On November 30,2020,staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project.No significant concerns were raised.
On December 18,2020,the applicant submitted the variance request.
On January 19,2021,the Planning Commission approved a 19-foot bluff impact zone and 29-foot bluff setback variance
for the construction of a deck,a bluff impact zone and bluff setback variance for the construction of retraining walls within
the bluff,and a 25-foot bluff,5-foot side yard,and 3-foot shoreland setback for a WOAS.
On June 4,2021,the applicant submitted a variance request to increase the width of the deck from 12 to 14 feet,replace
the western concrete window well and retaining wall with a living wall system,and add a 9-foot by 9-foot equipment pad
and associated retaining wall to east of the house.
On June 17,2021,staff contacted the applicant expressing concern over the proposed equipment pad and associated
retaining wall’s encroachment into the bluff,and requesting that the applicant investigate the possibility of relocating or
modifying the proposed equipment pad.
On June 22,2021,the applicant agreed to remove the 9-foot by 9-foot pad and associated retaining wall,revising the
design to work within the existing boulder wall and AC pad’s encroachment into the bluff setback.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission,acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments,approve a 20-foot bluff
impact zone and 30-foot bluff setback variance for the construction of a deck and a bluff impact zone and bluff setback
variance for the construction of retaining walls within the bluff subject to the Conditions of Approval,and adopt the
attached Findings of Fact and Decision.
1.A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction.
2.Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed building meets all requirements of
the Minnesota State Building Code additional comments or requirements may be required after plan review.
3.Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a building permit must
be obtained prior to construction.
4.The applicant shall install tree protection fencing at the furthest point from the trunk as possible around all trees
within the grading limits.
5.The applicant shall file for an Encroachment Agreement with the City for any encroachments within public
drainage and utility easements.
6.The at-grade deck may not cross the top of the bluff as shown on the plans dated June 4,2021.
7.The improvements must substantially conform to the plans dated June 4,2021,save that the depicted equipment
pad and associated retaining wall may not encroach into the bluff setback and impact zone beyond the
encroachment of the existing equipment pad and retaining wall.
8.All conditions and provisions of Variance 2021-07 referring to the property’s water-oriented accessory structure
shall be met.
PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREPORTTuesday,July 6,2021SubjectConsider a Request for Variances to Construct a Deck and Retaining Wall within theBluffSetbackandBluffImpactZoneonPropertylocatedat6609HorseshoeCurveSectionPUBLICHEARINGSItemNo:B.1.Prepared By MacKenzie Young-Walters,AssociatePlanner File No:Planning Case No.2021-07PROPOSEDMOTION:The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 20-foot bluff impact zone and 30-footbluffsetbackvariancefortheconstructionofadeckandabluffimpactzoneandbluffsetbackvariancefortheconstructionofretainingwallswithinthebluff,subject to the Conditions of Approval,and adopts theattachedFindingsofFactandDecision.SUMMARY OFREQUESTTheapplicantisrequestingthat the City allow them to extend the deck approved during the January 19,2021PlanningCommissionmeetinganadditionaltwofeetintothebluffsetback.As part of this redesign they are alsoproposingreplacingapreviouslyapprovedconcreteretainingwallandconcretewindowwellpadlocatedwithinthe bluffsetbackandimpactzonewithalivingwallsystemsimilartotheonepreviouslyapprovedtoreplacetheproperty’ssouthernretainingwall.The applicant’s submittal also includes a revised driveway configuration which increases the property’slotcoverbeyondwhatwasshownintheJanuary19,2021,though the resulting lot cover still remains underthedistrict's 25 percent lot cover limit.Changes to the walkway providing access to the lake are also proposed althoughalloftheseareallowedbyCityCodeanddonotfactorintotherequestedvariances.Finally,the applicantinitiallyproposedreplacingtheproperty’s existing equipment pad and associated retaining wall with a 9-foot by 9-footmaintenanceareaandassociatedretainingwallextendingintothebluffhowever,after consultation with stafftheyagreedtorevisetheirplanstostaywithintheexistingareaofencroachment.The applicant has stated that the revised deck configuration is necessary to accommodate foot traffic using thestaircasetotravelfromthefrontofthepropertytothelake.They note that the approved 12-foot deck width does notprovideadequatespaceforfurnitureandawalkwayandthatthe12-foot deck width had been selected when theproposeddeckwastoofanimperviousratherthanperviousdesignwiththegoalofminimizingimpervioussurface,a concernthatnolongapplies.They feel that there are potential safety risks caused by the narrow walking space provided by a 12-foot wide deck and that the two-foot increase would simply cover exposed ground while not requiring any newgradingorfootingswhichcouldnegativelyimpactthebluff.Regarding the proposed change to the western retaining wall and window well,the applicant notes that replacingaconcreteretainingwallwithalivingwallsystemwillallowforgreaterinfiltrationofstormwaterandalsoremoveslotcoverthatwouldotherwisebelocatedwithinthebluffimpactzone.Since the proposed living wall would cross thetopofthebluffandextendfurtherintothebluffthanthepreviouslyapprovedconcreteretainingwall,a variance isrequiredforthisretainingwall.Finally,the applicant has noted that the proposed driveway reconfiguration is needed to lessen the driveway’s gradeachangethatwillprovidesaferaccessinwinterandcreatealargerareaforvehiclestoturnaround.While thischangedoesincreasetheproperty’s lot cover beyond what had been proposed in January,they have noted that it stillreducestheproperty’s lot cover from the amount shown in the pre-existing conditions survey.They have also stated thattherevisedconfigurationallowsthedrivewaytolineupwiththeproposedstairsystemprovidingaccesstothelake.By way of background,the applicant has reminded staff that larger more significant encroachments,i.e.a rearbumpout,above-grade deck,and patio,were present in the area where they are requesting a variance to install an at-gradedeckpriortoa2018remodelwherethesefeatureswere removed.They have noted the removal of thepreviousfeatureshavelefttherearareabehindthehouseasanareaofdirtandweeds,without any improved area near therearpatiodoor,and that the approved deck does not fully cover this area.The applicant has stated that in 2020,boulders from the failing walls came loose and rolled down the hillcausingdamagetotheirproperty.They have stated that if they are not permitted to reconstruct the property’sremainingboulderwalls,they believe further erosion and damage will occur.Finally,they have noted that a living wall systemwasalreadyapprovedtoreplacethesouthernwallandthattheybelievethatusingthatsamesystemtoreplacethewesternretainingwallwouldachievebetteroutcomes.Staff recognizes that the applicant has provide a thoughtful proposal that does its utmost to balance the owners’needswithminimizingtheimpacttothebluffandlake.Furthermore,if the applicant had proposed the deck as part oftheinitialremodel,a substantial portion of it could have been approved without a variance as a reduction to anexistingnonconformity.Additionally,the condition of the existing retaining walls does require action and the applicant’sproposedlivingwallsolutionisdesignedtoaddressthesafetyanderosionconcernsinawaythatimproves thebluffrelativetotheexistingconditions.The City is typically hesitant to support variances allowing for an expansion of a previously issued variance however,inthiscase,the City feels that so long as the deck expansion is confined to the area previously degraded by the pre-existing features and their removal and does not require any regrading of the bluff,the difference in the impactbetweena12-foot wide and 14-foot wide deck is negligible.Additionally,staff believes that the proposed reconfiguration ofthewindowwellareaisanetimprovementontheoriginalplan.Finally,while staff would prefer not to see the driveway’simpervioussurfaceincrease,if it came in as a separate permit,staff would likely approve the permit as it wouldstillresultinanimpervioussurfacecoverageunderwhatisallowedbyCodeandlessthanwhatwaspreviouslypresent.Staff is also sympathetic to the applicants desire to do everything possible to minimize the slope on what isanextremelysteepdriveway,and while the overall slope of the driveway remains at 19%,the reconfiguration doeslessentheslopeonthelowersectionofthedriveway.For these reasons,staff is recommending approval of thevariancerequests.APPLICANTBrianT.and Elise R.Bruner,6609 Horseshoe Curve,Chanhassen,MN55317SITEINFORMATIONPRESENTZONING:RSF”Single-Family ResidentialDistrictLANDUSE:Residential LowDensityACREAGE:64 acresDENSITY:NAAPPLICATIONREGULATIONSChapter1,Section 1-2,Rules of Construction andDefinitionsChapter20,Article II,Division 3.VariancesChapter20,Article II,Division 4.NonconformingUsesChapter20,Article VII.Shoreland ManagementDistrictChapter20,Article XII,RSF”Single-Family ResidentialDistrictSection20-615,Lot Requirements andSetbacksChapter20,Article XXVIII,BluffProtectionBACKGROUNDGeneralHistoryInAprilof1999,the City approved a two-lot subdivision with variances allowing for a 20%driveway grade and 81-footshorelandsetback.**Note:At the time this subdivision was proposed,the ordinance required structures maintain the shoreland setbacks oftheadjacentproperties.This requirement was subsequently repealed and properties are subjected to the current 75-footshorelandsetback.In July of 1999,the City issued a building permit for the construction of a single-family home.In March of 2000,the City issued a building permit to add a deck.In November of 2018,the City issued a building permit for a significant remodel which include the demolition of theexistingdeckandpatio.In June of 2020,the City issued a building permit to add a rooftop deck.In April of 2021,the applicant applied for a building permit in compliance with Variance 2021-07.Several permits for interior work and maintenance are also on file with the City.Variance 2021-07HistoryOnMay21,2020,the designer contacted staff with a proposal for the site that included a large concrete patio off therearofthehome,a concrete patio and large water-oriented accessory structure WOAS)near the lake,and front yardparkingpad.On May 22,2020,staff expressed concerns about the likely presence of a bluff on the property and provided thedesignerwiththesectionsoftheCityCodethattheybelievedwouldapplytotheproposal.Staff indicated that the proposalwouldrequiremultiplevariances,and that a survey would be required to determine the exact nature and extent of the variances.On June 16,2020,the designer sent a revised plan and requested a meeting with staff to discuss potential variances.On June 18,2020,staff met with the applicant’s designer to discuss the proposed project.During the meetingstaffexpressedconcernregardingtheproposedsizeandplacementoftheWOAS,proposed front yard parking,andpresenceofimpervioussurfacewithinthebluffimpactzone.On July 16,2020,staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project.During the meeting staff expressedconcernregardingtheproposedsizeandplacementoftheWOAS,but was supportive of the plans to stabilize the bluffandproposedperviouspatioabovethebluff.On November 20,2020,staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project.The proposed WOAS hadbeenscaledbacktoaddressstaff’s concerns.On November 30,2020,staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project.No significant concerns were raised.On December 18,2020,the applicant submitted the variance request.On January 19,2021,the Planning Commission approved a 19-foot bluff impact zone and 29-foot bluff setbackvariancefortheconstructionofadeck,a bluff impact zone and bluff setback variance for the construction of retraining wallswithinthebluff,and a 25-foot bluff,5-foot side yard,and 3-foot shoreland setback for a WOAS.On June 4,2021,the applicant submitted a variance request to increase the width of the deck from 12 to 14 feet,replacethewesternconcretewindowwellandretainingwallwithalivingwallsystem,and add a 9-foot by 9-foot equipmentpadandassociatedretainingwalltoeastofthehouse.On June 17,2021,staff contacted the applicant expressing concern over the proposed equipment pad andassociatedretainingwall’s encroachment into the bluff,and requesting that the applicant investigate the possibility of relocatingormodifyingtheproposedequipmentpad.On June 22,2021,the applicant agreed to remove the 9-foot by 9-foot pad and associated retaining wall,revisingthedesigntoworkwithintheexistingboulderwallandACpad’s encroachment into the bluff setback.RECOMMENDATIONStaffrecommendsthePlanning Commission,acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments,approve a 20-footbluffimpactzoneand30-foot bluff setback variance for the construction of a deck and a bluff impact zone and bluffsetbackvariancefortheconstructionofretainingwallswithinthebluffsubjecttotheConditionsofApproval,and adopttheattachedFindingsofFactandDecision.1.A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction.2.Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that the proposed building meets all requirementsoftheMinnesotaStateBuildingCodeadditionalcommentsorrequirementsmayberequiredafterplanreview.3.Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a building permitmustbeobtainedpriortoconstruction.4.The applicant shall install tree protection fencing at the furthest point from the trunk as possible around alltreeswithinthegradinglimits.5.The applicant shall file for an Encroachment Agreement with the City for any encroachments withinpublicdrainageandutilityeasements.6.The at-grade deck may not cross the top of the bluff as shown on the plans dated June 4,2021.7.The improvements must substantially conform to the plans dated June 4,2021,save that the depictedequipmentpadandassociatedretainingwallmaynotencroachintothebluffsetbackandimpactzonebeyondtheencroachmentoftheexistingequipmentpadandretainingwall.8.All conditions and provisions of Variance 2021-07 referring to the property’s water-oriented accessorystructureshallbemet.
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report
Findings of Fact and Decision
Variance Document
Development Review Application
Narrative
Justification of Request,June 3
Justification of Request,June 4
Email Response to Staff Comments
Plan Set
WRC Memo
Affidavit of Mailing
Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 19,2021
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: July 6, 2021
CC DATE: July 26, 2021
REVIEW DEADLINE: August 3, 2021
CASE #: PC 2021-07A
BY: MYW
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting variances to replace an at-grade deck outside their rear patio door
extending to the top of the bluff and to reconstruct failing retaining walls within the bluff. The
project will also involve increasing the size of their driveway, removing a previously approved
concrete pad from the bluff setback and impact zone, rebuilding an existing retaining wall within
the bluff impact and setback zones, and reconfiguring a previously approved staircase providing
access to the lake; however, all of these items are permitted by City Code and do not require a
variance.
LOCATION: 6609 Horseshoe Curve
APPLICANT: Elise Bruner
6609 Horseshoe Curve
Chanhassen, MN 55317
OWNER: Brian Bruner
6609 Horseshoe Curve
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING: “RSF” – Single-Family
Residential District
2040 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density
ACREAGE: .64 acres DENSITY: NA
LEVEL OF CITY 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
relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation
from established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
PROPOSED MOTION:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 20-foot bluff impact zone and
30-foot bluff setback variance for the construction of a deck and a bluff impact zone and bluff
setback variance for the construction of retaining walls within the bluff subject to the Conditions
of Approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.”
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 2
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY:
The applicant is requesting that the City allow them to extend the deck approved during the
January 19, 2021 Planning Commission meeting an additional two feet into the bluff setback. As
part of this redesign, they are also proposing replacing a previously approved concrete retaining
wall and concrete window well pad located within the bluff setback and impact zone with a
living wall system similar to the one previously approved to replace the property’s southern
retaining wall. The applicant’s submittal also includes a revised driveway configuration which
increases the property’s lot cover beyond what was shown in the January 19, 2021, though the
resulting lot cover still remains under the District’s 25 percent lot cover limit. Changes to the
walkway providing access to the lake are also proposed although all of these are allowed by City
Code and do not factor into the requested variances. Finally, the applicant initially proposed
replacing the property’s existing equipment pad and associated retaining wall with a 9-foot by 9-
foot maintenance area and associated retaining wall extending into the bluff; however, after
consultation with staff they agreed to revise their plans to stay within the existing area of
encroachment.
The applicant has stated that the revised deck configuration is necessary to accommodate foot
traffic using the staircase to travel from the front of the property to the lake. They note that the
approved 12-foot deck width does not provide adequate space for furniture and a walkway and
that the 12-foot deck width had been selected when the proposed deck was of an impervious
rather than pervious design with the goal of minimizing the impervious surface, a concern that no
long applies. They feel that there are potential safety risks caused by the narrow walking space
provided by a 12-foot wide deck and that the two-foot increase would simply cover exposed
ground while not requiring any new grading or footings which could negatively impact the bluff.
Regarding the proposed change to the western retaining wall and window well, the applicant
notes that replacing a concrete retaining wall with a living wall system will allow for greater
infiltration of stormwater and also remove lot cover that would otherwise be located within the
bluff impact zone. Since the proposed living wall would cross the top of the bluff and extend
further into the bluff than the previously approved concrete retaining wall, a variance is required
for this retaining wall.
Finally, the applicant has noted that the proposed driveway reconfiguration is needed to lessen
the driveway’s grade; a change that will provide safer access in winter, and create a larger area
for vehicles to turn around. While this change does increase the property’s lot cover beyond what
had been proposed in January, they have noted that it still reduced the property’s lot cover from
the amount shown in the pre-existing conditions survey. They have also stated that the revised
configuration allows the driveway to line up with the proposed stair system providing access to
the lake.
By way of background, the applicant has reminded staff that larger more significant
encroachments, i.e. a rear bump out, above-grade deck, and patio, were present in the area where
they are requesting a variance to install an at grade deck prior to a 2018 remodel where these
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 3
features were removed. They have noted the removal of the previous features have left the rear
area behind the house as an area of dirt and weeds, without any improved area near the rear patio
door, and that the approved deck does not fully cover this area.
The applicant has stated that in 2020, boulders from the failing walls came loose and rolled down
the hill causing damage to their property. They have stated that if they are not permitted to
reconstruct the property’s remaining boulder walls, they believe further erosion and damage will
occur. Finally, they have noted that a living wall system was already approved to replace the
southern wall and that they believe that using that same system to replace the western retaining
wall would achieve better outcomes.
Staff recognizes that the applicant has provided a thoughtful proposal that does its utmost to
balance the owners’ needs with minimizing the impact to the bluff and lake. Furthermore, if the
applicant had proposed the deck as part of the initial remodel, a substantial portion of it could
have been approved without a variance as a reduction to an existing nonconformity.
Additionally, the condition of the existing retaining walls does require action and the applicant’s
proposed living wall solution is designed to address the safety and erosion concerns in a way that
improves the bluff relative to the existing conditions.
The city is typically hesitant to support variances allowing for an expansion of a previously
issued variance; however, in this case, the city feels that so long as the deck expansion is
confined to the area previously degraded by the pre-existing features and their removal and does
not require any regrading of the bluff, the difference in the impact between a 12-foot wide and
14-foot wide deck is negligible. Additionally, staff believes that the proposed reconfiguration of
the window well area is a net improvement on the original plan. Finally, while staff would prefer
not to see the driveway’s impervious surface increase, if it came in as a separate permit, staff
would likely approve the permit as it would still result in an impervious surface coverage under
what is allowed by Code and less than what was previously present. Staff is also sympathetic to
the applicant’s desire to do everything possible to minimize the slope on what is an extremely
steep driveway, and while the overall slope of the driveway remains at 19% the reconfiguration
does lessen the slope on the lower section of the driveway. For these reasons, staff is
recommending approval of the variance requests.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 1, Section 1-2, Rules of Construction and Definitions
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3. Variances
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 4. Nonconforming Uses
Chapter 20, Article VII. Shoreland Management District
Chapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” Single-Family Residential District
Section 20-615, Lot Requirements and Setbacks
Chapter 20, Article XXVIII, Bluff Protection
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 4
BACKGROUND
General History
In April of 1999, the City approved a two-lot subdivision with variances allowing for a 20%
driveway grade and 81-foot shoreland setback.*
Note: At the time this subdivision was proposed, the ordinance required structures maintain the
shoreland setbacks of the adjacent properties. This requirement was subsequently repealed and
properties are subjected to the current 75-foot shoreland setback.
In July of 1999, the City issued a building permit for the construction of a single-family home.
In March of 2000, the City issued a building permit to add a deck.
In November of 2018, the City issued a building permit for a significant remodel that include the
demolition of the existing deck and patio.
In June of 2020, the City issued a building permit to add a rooftop deck.
In April of 2021, the applicant applied for a building permit in compliance with Variance 2021-07.
Several permits for interior work and maintenance are also on file with the City.
Variance 2021-07 History
On May 21, 2020, the designer contacted staff with a proposal for the site that included a large
concrete patio off the rear of the home, a concrete patio and large water-oriented accessory structure
WOAS) near the lake, and front yard parking pad.
On May 22, 2020, staff expressed concerns about the likely presence of a bluff on the property and
provided the designer with the sections of the City Code that they believed would apply to the
proposal. Staff indicated that the proposal would require multiple variances and that a survey would
be required to determine the exact nature and extent of the variances.
On June 16, 2020, the designer sent a revised plan and requested a meeting with staff to discuss
potential variances.
On June 18, 2020, staff met with the applicant’s designer to discuss the proposed project. During the
meeting, staff expressed concern regarding the proposed size and placement of the WOAS,
proposed front yard parking, and presence of impervious surface within the bluff impact zone.
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 5
On July 16, 2020, staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project. During the meeting,
staff expressed concern regarding the proposed size and placement of the WOAS, but was
supportive of the plans to stabilize the bluff and proposed pervious patio above the bluff.
On November 20, 2020, staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project. The proposed
WOAS had been scaled back to address staff’s concerns.
On November 30, 2020, staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project. No significant
concerns were raised.
On December 18, 2020, the applicant submitted the variance request.
On January 19, 2021, the Planning Commission approved a 19-foot bluff impact zone and 29-foot
bluff setback variance for the construction of a deck, a bluff impact zone and bluff setback variance
for the construction of retraining walls within the bluff, and a 25-foot bluff, 5-foot side yard, and 3-
foot shoreland setback for a WOAS.
On June 4, 2021, the applicant submitted a variance request to increase the width of the deck form
12 to 14 feet, replace the western concrete window well and retaining wall with a living wall
system, and add a 9-foot by 9-foot equipment pad and associated retaining wall to the east of the
house.
On June 17, 2021, staff contacted the applicant expressing concern over the proposed equipment
pad and associated retaining wall’s encroachment into the bluff, and requested that the applicant
investigate the possibility of relocating or modifying the proposed equipment pad.
On June 22, 2021, the applicant agreed to remove the 9-foot by 9-foot pad and associated retaining
wall, revising the design to work within the existing boulder wall and AC pad’s encroachment into
the bluff setback.
SITE CONSTRAINTS
Zoning Overview
The property is zoned Single-Family Residential District, is located within the Shoreland
Management District, and is subject to the Bluff Protection ordinance. This zoning classification
requires riparian lots to be a minimum of 20,000 square feet, have front and rear yard setbacks of
30 feet, side yard setbacks of 10 feet, a shoreland setback of 75 feet, and limits parcels to a
maximum of 25 percent lot cover. Residential structures are limited to 35 feet in height, and
properties are allowed one WOAS up to 250 square feet in size within the 75-foot shoreland
setback. Structures must be setback 30 feet from the top, side, and toe of the bluff, and alteration
of the land and vegetation within the bluff impact zone is heavily restricted. Both the shoreland
and bluff ordinance allow the construction of stairways, lifts, and landings, subject to design
criteria. A portion of the property is also encumbered by a sanitary sewer easement.
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 6
The lot is 27,878 square feet with 6,377 square feet (23 percent) lot cover. The existing house
has a nonconforming bluff setback of between 5 and 19 feet, with a porch that encroaches into
the bluff. The property also features retaining walls located within the bluff impact zone. The
home’s WOAS is a nonconforming 308-square foot structure with a 3-foot bluff setback, 5-foot
side yard setback, and 7-foot shoreland setback. This WOAS is also located within the city’s
sanitary sewer easement. The house and other features appear to meet all other requirements of
the City Code.
Bluff Creek Corridor
This is not encumbered by the Bluff Creek Overlay District.
Bluff Protection
There is a bluff on the property. The
City’s Bluff Protection ordinance requires
structures to be setback 30 feet from the
top, toe, and side of the bluff and prohibits
the alteration to land or vegetation within
the bluff impact zone, the area of the bluff
and within 20 feet of the top of the bluff.
Stairways, lifts, and landings are
permitted in areas where they will not
redirect water flow or increase drainage
velocity so long as they do not exceed
four feet in width and meet other design
criteria. Limited topographic alterations,
grading, and filling within the bluff
impact zone is permitted through an
earthwork permit, subject to standards
designed to protect the integrity of the
bluff.
Floodplain Overlay
This property is not within a floodplain.
Shoreland Management
The property is located within a Shoreland Protection District. This District requires a 75-foot
structure setback from the lake’s ordinary high water level (OHWL) and limits the property to a
maximum impervious surface coverage of 25 percent. The shoreland ordinance permits one
WOAS to be located within the 75-foot shoreland setback, provided that it is at least 10 feet from
the ordinary high water level, no larger than 250 square feet, and has a maximum height of 10
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 7
feet. Stairways, lifts and landings providing access up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore
areas are also permitted so long as they do not exceed four feet in width, do not cause soil
erosion, and meet other design criteria.
Wetland Protection
There is not a wetland located in the development site.
NEIGHBORHOOD
Pleasant View/Alicia Heights
The plat for Pleasant View was recorded in March of 1910 and Alicia Heights, a two-lot
subdivision within Pleasant View, was recorded in June of 1999. Pleasant View is one of the
oldest neighborhoods in the city and it predates the establishment of the City of Chanhassen and
its ordinances. The neighborhood is located on a peninsula jutting into Lotus Lake and this
combined with challenging topography meaning it has a large number of atypically shaped lots,
many of which do not conform to current city standards. Some of the homes are original to the
neighborhood, while others are new construction or have been extensively updated. Many
properties have nonconforming elements or have received variances due to the age of the
neighborhood and atypical configuration of the lots.
Variances within 500 feet:
6605 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1991-09): 17’ shoreland setback (deck) – Approved
6609 Horseshoe Curve (PC 2021-07): 19’ bluff impact zone and 29’ bluff setback (deck), bluff
impact zone and bluff setback (retaining wall), and 25’
bluff, 5’ side, and 3’ shoreland setback (WOAS) -
Approved
6631 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1996-07): 15’ shoreland setback (addition and attached garage) –
Approved
6677 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1982-03): 25’ front and 7’ side setback (detached garage) –
Approved
6681 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1986-15): 6’ side setback (detached garage) – Withdrawn
PC 1987-03): 6’ side setback (detached garage) – Approved
PC 2002-10): 16’ front and 5’ side setback, 4% LC (detached garage
and addition) – Approved
6691 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1987-14): 19.6’ front setback (detached garage) – Approved
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 8
6697 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1985-02): 9.03’ side setback (addition, intensify nonconforming) –
Approved
ANALYSIS
Expanded At-Grade Deck
The applicant is requesting a variance
to construct an at-grade deck that at its
closest point would reach the top of the
bluff. Earlier this year the Planning
Commission issued a variance allowing
a proposed deck to be placed one foot
from the top of the bluff. The applicant
has indicated that as they finalized their
design they realized that the approved
12-foot wide deck did not provide
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 9
adequate space to accommodate both furniture and foot traffic. They have indicated that the
requested two-foot expansion would not require additional footings, would not require any
grading or alteration of the existing slope, and would simply cover an existing exposed area
between the edge of the approved deck and top of the bluff.
As with the previously issued variance, staff’s primary concern in evaluating this request is the
protection of the bluff and prevention of any activities that may increase the risk of erosion.
Switching from a 12-foot wide to 14-foot wide deck is not anticipated to create additional runoff,
and staff remains comfortable with the design and configuration of the property’s drainage
system. If this area was covered by established vegetation or if the proposal required grading,
staff would recommend against allowing further encroachment into the bluff setback; however,
in this instance, moving the deck closer to the top of the bluff is not expected to alter or
negatively impact the bluff.
Additionally, the expanded deck still represents an improvement from the conditions present on
the property in 2018 when: a 144-square foot bump out projected eight feet from the home with a
12-foot bluff setback; a 225-square foot above-grade deck projected out 15 feet from the existing
porch and was located partially within the bluff; and, an approximate 200-square foot concrete
patio connected the deck and bump out within the bluff impact zone. A final factor in
determining the appropriateness of granting a variance, is the fact that a bluff was not present on
the property when the home was built. In 1999, when the home was built, there was a steep slope
in the rear yard that did not meet the definition of a bluff. As part of the permit to construct the
home, a retaining wall was shown in the rear yard. This retaining wall leveled off approximately
20 feet of the rear yard creating a steeper slope that met the definition of a bluff. Since the
original survey did not show a bluff on the property and as-built surveys were not required at that
time, permits were issued based on the fact that the available survey did not show a bluff. It was
not until the scope of work proposed in May 2020 triggered the need for a new survey that the
presence of a bluff on the property was confirmed.
Ordinarily, staff would not support the expansion of a previously issued bluff variance; however,
this is a very unique situation. The 2018 removal of the pre-existing structures has left an area of
bare soil and weeds between the house and top of the bluff, rendering most concerns about
removing vegetation within the bluff impact zone moot, and the applicant’s proposed expansion
is not expected to alter the bluff. Additionally, the applicant’s desire to have an improved area
outside of their patio door is reasonable and in keeping with what is present on the surrounding
properties. While the applicant’s proposed deck is larger than the minimum size necessary to
provide an improved surface off of the patio door, staff believes the requested dimensions are
reasonable in light of what was previously present on the property.
For the above reasons, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve a 20-foot
bluff impact zone and a 30-foot bluff setback variance to permit the construction of the proposed
deck.
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 10
Retaining Walls
The applicant’s original variance called for
replacing the southern boulder retaining wall
with a living wall system and replacing the
western boulder retaining wall with a
concrete retaining wall and concrete window
well pad. Both of these walls were in need
of repair, with the southern wall shedding
boulders down the hill. The City granted the
applicant a variance to replace the walls
because the proposed retaining walls,
especially the living wall system, were
deemed to be less impactful to the bluff than
replacing the existing walls in their existing
location and configuration, which the
homeowner could have done under the City’s nonconforming use ordinance without a variance.
The applicant is now proposing replacing the western
retaining wall with a living wall system rather than
the previously approved concrete retaining wall and
pad. The proposed living wall system would utilize a
type of geogrid replete with plantings to anchor and
support the slope. These systems utilize both geogrid
and root structure of the plants to help prevent
erosion, and the plant roots have the added benefit of
helping to absorb stormwater. This change would also
remove approximately 81 square feet of impervious
surface located adjacent to the top of the bluff
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 11
Staff believes the proposed
living wall system is a viable,
innovative, and
environmentally responsible
alternative to traditional
retaining walls. Since the living
wall system requires regrading
that will extend the “retaining
wall” area further into the bluff,
it is not considered a simple
replacement of an existing
nonconforming use and
requires a variance; however,
staff believes this proposal
represents an improvement over
both the pre-existing boulder
wall and previously approved concrete wall and pad.
Regarding the impact of the revised deck configuration on the
previously approved southern living wall system, the
applicant has stated that due to the level nature of the area
where they are proposing to extend the deck, there will be no
significant alterations to the previously approved living wall
system. Engineering staff has reviewed the proposed plans
and agrees with the applicant’s assessment that the expanded deck will not substantively alter the
southern living wall.
For the above reasons, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the
variance to permit the construction of retaining walls within the bluff impact zone.
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 12
Impact on Neighborhood
Pleasant View is an older neighborhood with
many atypically shaped lots, nonconformities,
and variances. The applicant’s revised
proposal will replace a boulder retaining wall
along the top of the bluff with a more
environmentally friendly living wall and
remove approximately 65 square feet of lot
cover immediately adjacent to the top of the
bluff. The proposed two-foot increase in deck
width from the previous proposal will still
respect the bluff line and will be setback
approximately 90 feet from the ordinary high
water level. The revised deck will have less
of a visual and environmental impact than the
deck and patio that were present on the
property before the 2018 remodel. The
applicant has worked to create a proposal that
is minimally impactful to the property’s
environmental features. The use of a living wall system instead of a traditional retaining wall will
help stabilize the bluff and should prevent further erosion. None of the applicant’s proposed
improvements will negatively impact the neighboring properties or recreational users of Lotus
Lake.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments,
approve a 20-foot bluff impact zone and 30-foot bluff setback variance for the construction of a
deck and a bluff impact zone and bluff setback variance for the construction of retaining walls
within the bluff subject to the Conditions of Approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact
and Decision.
1. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction.
2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building meets
all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code; additional comments or
requirements may be required after plan review.
3. Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and
a building permit must be obtained prior to construction.
4. The applicant shall install tree protection fencing at the furthest point from the trunk as
possible around all trees within the grading limits.
5. The applicant shall file for an Encroachment Agreement with the city for any
encroachments within public drainage and utility easements.
6609 Horseshoe Curve Request
for Variance
July 6, 2021
Page 13
6. The at-grade deck may not cross the top of the bluff as shown on the plans dated June 4,
2021.
7. The improvements must substantially conform to the plans dated June 4, 2021, save that
the depicted equipment pad and associated retaining wall may not encroach into the bluff
setback and impact zone beyond the encroachment of the existing equipment pad and
retaining wall.
8. All conditions and provisions of variance 2021-07 referring to the property’s water-
oriented accessory structure shall be met.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings of Fact and Decision (Approval)
2. Variance Document (Approval)
3. Development Review Application
4. Variance Request Narrative
5. Variance Request Justification
6. Email Response to Staff Comments
7. Plan Set
8. Variance Documents
9. WRC Memo
10. Affidavit of Mailing
11. January 19, 2021 Staff Report (PC 2021-07)
g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-07a 6609 horseshoe curve july 6 variance request\staff report_6609 horseshoe curve_var_2.docx
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
APPROVAL)
IN RE:
Application of Elise Bruner on behalf of Brian Bruner for variances to replace/rebuild retaining
walls and construct an at-grade deck on a property zoned Single-Family Residential District (RSF) -
Planning Case 2021-07A.
On July 6, 2021, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and mailed
notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Single-Family Residential District (RSF).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Low Density.
3. The legal description of the property is:
Lots 1, Block 1, Alicia Heights
4. Variance Findings – Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance:
a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and
intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Finding: It is the intent of the city’s Zoning Code to protect the city’s environmental
resources by preventing the construction of structures near the top, side, and toe of bluffs as
well as limiting the size and nature of structures near lakes; however, property owners have
the right to repair and replace nonconforming structures. It is also the intent of the
nonconforming use ordinance to encourage property owners with nonconforming structures
to reduce the extent of existing nonconformities and bring their properties closer to
complying with City Code by allowing them to replace an existing nonconforming structure
with a less intensive nonconformity.
In this case, the applicant’s proposal reduces the size and impact of a pre-existing boulder
retaining wall and previously approved concrete retaining wall and pad, with a more
environmentally sensitive living wall. While the footprint of the wall in places exceed the
footprint of the wall it is replacing, it is less impactful than either the boulder wall or concrete
wall that it is replacing and it represents an environmentally responsible solution for a
complicated parcel with numerous nonconformities.
2
The proposed deck is replacing a deck, patio, and bump out that was removed from the bluff
impact zone in 2018. While the nonconforming use ordinance does stipulate that
nonconformities discontinued for more than a year cannot be replaced, the proposed deck has
been designed to have minimal impact on the bluff and is much less impactful than what was
previously present on the property.
Given that it is the intent of the City Code to allow the owners of nonconforming properties
opportunities to make reasonable improvements to their property, granting a variance to
permit thoughtfully designed and environmentally sensitive improvements that remove
numerous nonconforming elements is in line with the intent of the City Code and consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan.
b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "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 this Chapter.
Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for
solar energy systems.
Finding: The applicant’s proposal to add a deck to the property is reasonable given the
improvements (deck, patio, and bump out) that were previously present on the property and
the presence of broadly similar rear-facing decks and patios present on neighboring
properties. Additionally, the presence of steep slopes throughout the rear yard means there is
no place where a rear-facing deck could be placed without receiving a variance from the
city’s bluff ordinance.
It is also reasonable for the applicant to request a variance to replace failing nonconforming
retaining walls with new, more environmentally sensitive, retaining walls in order to
maintain the integrity of the slope.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The variance request is not solely based upon economic considerations.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the
landowner.
Finding: The plight of the landowner is due to pre-existing conditions on the property,
including the nonconforming location of the house, retaining walls, and water-oriented
accessory structure. All of these conditions were present on the property, prior to the
applicant purchasing the property and commencing their remodeling and landscaping
projects.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding: Pleasant View/Alicia Heights is an older neighborhood with many atypically
shaped lots, nonconformities, and variances. The applicant’s proposal will result in a more
environmentally sensitive retaining wall along the western top of the bluff and the creation of
an at-grade deck approximately 90 feet from the lake’s Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL).
3
The proposed deck will have less of a visual impact than the deck and patio that were present
on the property before the 2018 remodel, and proposed western living wall system will not be
visually obtrusive. None of the applicant’s proposed improvements will negatively impact
the neighboring properties or recreational users of Lotus Lake.
f. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes
Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
Finding: This does not apply to this request.
5. The planning report #2021-07A, dated July 6, 2021, prepared by MacKenzie Young-Walters, is
incorporated herein.
DECISION
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 20-foot bluff impact zone
and 30-foot bluff setback variance for the construction of a deck and a bluff impact zone and bluff
setback variance for the construction of retaining walls within the bluff, subject to the following
conditions of approval:
1. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction.
2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building meets all
requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code; additional comments or requirements
may be required after plan review.
3. Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a
building permit must be obtained prior to construction.
4. The applicant shall install tree protection fencing at the furthest point from the trunk as
possible around all trees within the grading limits.
5. The applicant shall file for an Encroachment Agreement with the city for any encroachments
within public drainage and utility easements.
6. The at-grade deck may not cross the top of the bluff as show on the plans dated June 4, 2021.
7. The improvements must substantially conform to the plans dated June 4, 2021, save that the
depicted equipment pad and associated retaining wall may not encroach into the bluff setback
and impact zone beyond the encroachment of the existing equipment pad and retaining wall.
8. All conditions and provisions of variance 2021-07 referring to the property’s water-oriented
accessory structure shall be met.”
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 6th day of July, 2021.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
Steven Weick, Chairman
g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-07a 6609 horseshoe curve july 6 variance request\findings of fact and decision 6609 horseshoe curve (approval).doc
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
VARIANCE 2021-07A
1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby
grants the following variance:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 20-foot bluff impact zone
and 30-foot bluff setback variance for the construction of a deck and a bluff impact zone
and bluff setback variance for the construction of retaining walls within the bluff.
2. Property. The variance is for a property situated in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County,
Minnesota, and legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Alicia Heights.
3. Conditions. The variance approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction.
2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building meets
all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code; additional comments or
requirements may be required after plan review.
3. Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and
a building permit must be obtained prior to construction.
4. The applicant shall install tree protection fencing at the furthest point from the trunk as
possible around all trees within the grading limits.
5. The applicant shall file for an Encroachment Agreement with the city for any
encroachments within public drainage and utility easements.
6. The at-grade deck may not cross the top of the bluff as shown on the plans dated June 4,
2021.
7. The improvements must substantially conform to the plans dated June 4, 2021, save that
the depicted equipment pad and associated retaining wall may not encroach into the bluff
2
setback and impact zone beyond the encroachment of the existing equipment pad and
retaining wall.
8. All conditions and provisions of Variance 2021-07 referring to the property’s water-
oriented accessory structure shall be met.
4. Lapse. If within one (1) year of the issuance of this variance the allowed construction has not
been substantially completed, this variance shall lapse.
Dated: July 6, 2021 CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
SEAL) Elise Ryan, Mayor
AND:
Laurie Hokkanen, City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,
2021 by Elise Ryan, Mayor, and Heather Johnston, Interim City Manager, of the City of
Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to
authority granted by its City Council.
NOTARY PUBLIC
DRAFTED BY:
City of Chanhassen
7700 Market Boulevard
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
952) 227-1100
g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-07a 6609 horseshoe curve july 6 variance request\variance document 21-07a.doc
COiIiIUNITYDEVELOP ENT OEPARTIENT
Planning Oivision - 7700 Market Boulevard
Mailing Address - P O. Box '147, Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: (952) ?27-1100 / Fax: (952) 227-1'110 *
MYMCHII{IIASSIN
Submittal
Ll
APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
r.n1 b-L2!--CC Dale 1 JL )l 6 0-Oay *"r"* O"rS 3letI
Section 1: Application Type (check all that apply)
Flefer lo the awropiate Applbatbn checkn* lot equiEd
E Comprehensive Plan Amendment......................... $600EMinorMUSAlineforfailingon-site ser!,Ers.....t100
E Conditional Use Permit (CUP)!
tr
Single-Family Residence
All others....,...................
325
425
n lnterim Use Permit (lUP)
ln coniunction with Single-Family Residence.. $325EAllOthers........ ..... . . ......$425
n Rezoning (REZ)
D Planned Unit Development (PUD)..................
S75OEMinorAmendmenttoexistingPUD......-.......... $
1OOEAllOthers........ ................... $500
n Sign Plan Review............................,.. .......... . ...... $150
E Site Plan Review (SPR)
E Administrative. ................... S100ECommercial/lndustrial Districts'...................... $500
Plus $10 pe l,000 square feet of building area:(
thousand square feet)
lndude number of 9!lE!,49 empbyees: _
lnclude number oI49! empbyees:
E Residential oistficts.,...,........... s500
Plus S5 per dr\tllirE unit (- units)
Subdivision (SUB)
Create 3lots or less . ... ...-
a;;;i;;,;;1 r"i; - .. .........(
lots)
Metes & Bounds (2 lots).................
Consolidate Lots........................ .... ... .. .....
Lot Line Adjustment.........................................
Final P|at................
lncludes $450 escrow for attorney costs)'
Additional escrovJ may be required for other applications
lhrougi the delelopment contracl.
E Vacation of Easements/Right-of-wey (VAC)........ $300
Addilional recording bes may apply)
@ Variance (VAR).................................................... $2OO
E Wetland Alteration Permit (wAP)
D Single-Family Residence................ .............. $150!
A ohers........ ................. SzTs
D ZoningAppeal ....................... $1OO
n Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA)................. $500
IIQ]E Whln mulupb applk lior! .rc p.occ..ed concumntly,
tho rpproprirE frq rhsll bs charged lor..ch appllcado.r.
L_ addresses)
50 per document
D Site Plan Agreement
tr
trnn
E Notitication Sign lcity ro insratt and .emove) ................
E Property Oimers' List within 500' lcity to generae afrer prE-apptbation meeting)
El Escrow for Recording Documents (checkall thatapply)............................
D Conditional Use Permit D lnterim Use Permit
Vacation @ Variance
Meles & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) ! Easements L- easements)
Wetland Alteralion Permit
Oeeds
Section 2: Required lnformation
Description of Proposal
Property Address or Location
Parcel #: 250550010
REVISION: BLUFF ENCROACHMENT AREA VARIANCE
6609 HORSESHO E6Upy E, CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
Legal Description:RESIDENTIAL
0.64 Wetlands Pres€nt?ff ves fl tto
Single-Family Residential District (RSF)Requested Zoning Selecl One
Present Land Use Oesignation Select One
lotal Acreage:
Present Zoning
Existing Use of Properly:RESIDENTIAL
Requested Land use DesignatiofflFPbFto{RNHAssEN
RECEIVED
E]Check box if separate nanative is attached.
CHANHASSEN PI.{IJNING DEPI
brittal intoination that must eompahy this appl'ralan)
TOTAL FEE:
JUN 0 4 202t
Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant lnformation
APPLICANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, l, as applicant, represent to have obtained
authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to
the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. lf this application has not been signed by
the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file the application. This application
should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contac,t regarding any matter pertaining to this
application I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I
further understand that addilional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to
any authorization to proceed with the study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are fue and correct.
Name EttsE BRUNtrR Contact
Phone:Address
City/State/Zip:Cell:
Fax:
Oate
lsz- 717 -26 l1
Emait: e brv ef brvnell
Signature:/(-oE-a-t)t
PROPERTY OWI'IER: ln srgning this application, l, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do,
authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree to be bound by those
conditions, sub.iect only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep mysetf intormed of
the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may
be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, elc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the
study. I certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.
Name:ERtfrN BRuNEtz
Address
City/State/Zip Cell:
Fax:
6/2-zos-E/1'/
Email:vn I 0v.@1
Signature:Date.z-!l
This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans reguired by
applicable City Ordinance provisions. Beficre fling this application, refer to lhe appropriate Appliettion Checklist
and confer with the Planning Oepadment to determine the specific ordinance and applicable procedural
requiremenls and fees.
A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A
wriften notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application.
Contacl:
Phone:
Cell:
Fax:
Who ghould rcceiyo copies of staff reports?'Other Contact lnfotmation:
El Property Owner Via
El Applicant Via
E Engineer Via
E othef via
Email
Email
Email
E Maited Paper Copy
A Maited Paper Copy
E Maited Paper Copy
E Mailed Paper copy
Name TRAVIS VAN LIERE
Address 21 1 N 1ST STREET #350
MINNEAPOL rs. MN 55401
NSTRUCT|O]{S TO APPLICAI{T: Complete all necessary form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your
Oevice. pntUf fOnllt and deliverlo city along \ dth required documents and payment. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital
copy to the city for Processing
SAVE FORT'SUBirlIT FORIiI
E Email
Caty/State/Zip
Email:travis@tvl ro.com
PROJECT Et{Glt{EER (if aPplicable)
No-o
Address:
Citv/State/Zio:
Email:
contac
Phone.
Section 4: Notification lnformation
PRINT FOR*I
tvl s
June l+.2021
City of Chanhassen
Community Deve[opment Department
P[anning Division
7700 Market Btvd
P0 Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: WRITTEN DESCRIPTI0N 0F VARIANCE RE0UEST
To whom it may concern,
As required by the City of Chanhassen, we are respectfulty submitting this written description of
variance requests for the following property:
Bruner Residence
6609 Horseshoe Curve
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Va riances Reouested
1. REVISI0N: Btuff Setback Area Encroachment Variance
Extension of Previousty Proposed and City-Approved House-Adjacent Deck
The existing home on this property was buiLt in 1999 and recently remodeled in 2017 by Christian
Dean Architecture. The [andscape was not considered at that time, so the current project is
looking to finalize Landscaping on the property while considering client needs whi[e respectfutly
meeting existing codes and standards.
This house non-conforming due to encroachment into btuff setback, hence variance for certain
items are needed. Please see the written justification of variance request for further information.
Our design team met with the city ptanning office severa[ times throughout the process of this
project. This variance request is additionaI to the approved variance apptication by the City of
Chanhassen on January 191h,2021 .
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVED
JUN 04 2021
TRAVIS VA]{ LIERE STUOIO
211 north lst street suite 1350
minneapolis. mn 55401
o 6LZ 343 4?75
Summarv of Concern
1
CHAI,IHASSEN Pt-Afl t{[ic DEpf
ConcLusion
0ur desig n team and the cLients have continued to work with the city and other governing agencies
to deveLop a plan that maintains the spirit and works in concert with the applicabte city codes and
ordinances whiLe providing practicaI use for the property by the owners.
Thank you in advance for your due consideration of our request for a variance.
S in ce re [y,
Travis Van Liere, PLA, ASLA
Principa[ - Travis Van Liere Studio
tvl s
3
IRAVIS VAI{ LIENE STUOIO
211 no.th 1st street suite #350
minneapoljs, mn 55401
o 672 345 4?75
June 3, 2021
CHAIIHASSEN PI.AI{NING DEPI
City of Chanhassen
Community Development Department
Planning Division
7700 Market Blvd
PO Box '147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: WRITTEN JUSTIFICATION FOR SECOND VARIANCE REQUEST FOR 6609 HORSESHOE
CURVE, CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 COMPLIES WTH THE FINDINGS FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE
PURSUANT TO SECTION 20.58
Dear Planning Division,
As required by the City of Chanhassen, we are respectfully submitting this written justification in support of
our second variance request.
While the updated variance request information contained here is not overwhelming, we want to do this
proiect in the right way and go through the conect channels. Sometimes in projecls of this nature, you do
not know exaclly how a layout or plan is going to look or feel until you physically are on site. Seeing as we
started our plans nearly 2 years ago, there have naturally been some changes.
Sec. 20-58. General conditions for orantino.
To review, a variance may be granted if all of the following criteria are met:
1) Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and inlent
of this chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan.
2) When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical
difiiculties,' as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the prop€rty owner
proposes to use the prop€rty in a reasonable manner not permitted by this chapter. Practical
difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems.
3) That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
4) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the
landowner.
5) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
6) Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in M.S. S 216C.06, subd.
14, when in harmony with this chapter.
GITY OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVEO
JUN 04 2021
Our second variance request is being done proactively, and we are trying to comply with the City of
chanhassenandabidebythestatedprovisionsofour&ady4@'withonlysomeSlight
modifications.
We understand that variances are requested when the strict enforcement of the ordinance would cause a
practical difficulty" because of circumstances unique to the property, such as when the property cannot be
put to reasonable use because of its size, physicel sunoundings, shape, or topography. ln mnsideration
of all equities and hardships in this case, we believe that our application wanants favorable discretion, since
eveMhing we hope to do will improve the use of this property and reduce further degradation of the
property.
1. Reasonableness
We confirm that as homeowners, we propose to use our property in a reasonable manner. While we would
like to use our property in a oarticularlv reasonable wav, we cannot cunently do so under the rules of the
applicable ordinance.
At the current time, we do not have reasonable use of our lake property. With a severely sloped
property from the road to the house, and again from the front side to lake, there are essentially two
2) limited flat areas on the lakeside for family recreation, including:
1) lower patio area by the slider door that is accessible from our walk-out home.
2) flat patio area by shoreline.
2. Uniqueness
Our cunent problem is due to circumstances unique to this property and was Ogllcaused by our actions. As
noted by the enclosed documentation, the physical characteristics of our property present unique
challenges due to the sloping topography and limited accessible space for use.
3. Essential Character
Provided this second variance is granted, the comprehensive plan will not alter the essential character of
our property or locality. The extension of our deck will not be out of scale, out of place, or otheMise
inconsistent with the sunounding area.
POTENTIAL CHANGES REQUESTED IN 2t,ID VARIANCE APPLICATION
1 . Extend bamboo composite deck off house 2 feet for a dimensional variance. This change amounts
to 14 feet instead of 12 feet. *'See discussion below.
2. Reduce overall length of bamboo composite staircase from lake to house to avoid damage and/or
removal of trees near the house. This change shortens the staircase overall from the lakeside to
the house. The comprehensive plan seeks to pIgSCryg the pre-existing tree canopy on the property.
We do not wish to disrupt the beauty ofthe mature trees that we have.
3. Replace the full concrete window well (which was originally designed as a three-sided retaining
wall) on west side of house with one ('l) main concrete retaining wall and living retaining wall (i.e.,
vegetation wall). The living wall was already approved in our first variance to be used on the
lakeside to replace the degraded retaining rock wall. We want to extend the use of this natural
product to the side of the house instead of concrete. The use of additional living walls will again
allow water to absorb into the soil and slow erosion. Living retaining walls function just as a
traditional stone or timber wall, and typically require much less actual building material to construct.
ln keeping with the plan, we hope to reduce storm water runoff and erosion.
4. Shift new driveway location to the west 1 1 feet.
PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES
EXTENSION OF BAMBOO DECKING FROM 12 TO 14 FEET
We fully understand and respect that the City of Chanhassen remains concemed about the bluff setback.
We believe our request for 2 feet of bamboo decking is reasonable and comports with the normal and
customary use of the space without unduly impacting the bluff.
To go back in time, and in relation to one of the specific changes to our pro.iect details #1 above, we had
originally planned to install a full concrete slab as the terrace material outside the sliding door next to our
house. Due to concems raised by the City of Chanhassen concerning hardcover percentage with the
use of concrete, the size ofthe walkout deck was twelve (12) feet.
Upon further reflection, we ultimately selected a more user-friendly, non-hardcover bamboo
composite. This product is permeable, sturdy, and provides us with the necessary decking and stair
material to make less of an impact on the property overall. Unfortunately, when the plan was submitted to
the City of Chanhassen for review, the size of the deck did not account for the fact that it was no longer
concrete. ln other words, since the deck product changed to a permeable product and is NOT hardcover,
we are respectfully requesting an additional 2 feet of decking.
The extension of deckinq souarelv falls within the Sec. 20-58. General conditions for orantinq as
follows:
g\EEry: First, this additional soace provides more safetv to oeoole using the deck as a walkway to
pass through to go down lo lhe stairs and lake. As it stands, a 12-foot deck provides gglDe, but not ample
walk-through space, especially with the need for space to exist between the house and fumiture. Having
this added space would allow for reasonable use of the property, in a permissible manner and with due
reoard for safew. The two-foot dimensional variance is minimally required to account for safety
considerations. Therefore, we want to ensure lhat people are not tripping or losing their footing when
passing through on the deck. Creatino more accessible space for oeoole will reduce the ootential for
trips/falls or other accidents.
USER ENJOYMENT: Second,this sDace fundamentallv adds to the user enioyment and utilization
of the space, which would otherwise not be utilized for anything. ln other words, it increases the value of
the property. The normal flow of foot traffic was not fully undeGtood until the area was staked. We did not
realize this was going to be the case until the property was physically staked only a few weeks ago. Seeing
something in a drawing and then going into the field with stakes are different things. The enjoyment of this
property is, in fact, unique, in that there are basically two (2) areas where people can congregate: Either
we enjoy the space directly outside our walkout deck next to the house, or we go down to the lake.
CONCLUSION
lntheend'thefromwhatitisnow.ouraimistotry
and improve the natural enjoyment of the property while balancing the interests of the natural
environment. We have selected products and made changes that we believe improve the property and
preserve the surroundings. Thank you in advance for your due consideration of our request for a second
variance.
Sincerely,
NOT IMPEDING INTO BLUFF: Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, the addition of two feet of decking
does not impede into the bluff. There is no need tor an overhano. nor does this two-foot extension
reouire anv additional footinos. tree removal. or qradinq. These two feet of decking are a natural
extension over ground that would otherwise not be used.
Elise Bruner and Brian Bruner
June 4,2021 CITY OF CHANHASSEN
RECEIVED
JUN 04 202t
CIIAI'JIIASSEN PI.AJ{I,JIiIG DEPT
RE: WRITTEN JUSTIFICATION OF HOW VARIANCE REQUEST FOR 6606
HORSESHOE CURVE, CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 COMPLIES WITH THE FINDINGS
FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE PURSUANT TO SECT]ON 20-58
Dear Planning Commission, City Council and Staff Members,
We respectively submit a request to amend portions of our approved variance
application from the City of Chanhassen for 6609 Horseshoe Curve - Planning Case
2021-07. We are reaffirming our commitment to doing this project in the right way and
going through the proper channels and authorities. We realize this a unique
circumstance and not a typical request after previously applying and being granted a
variance on our project this past winter.
However, sometimes with projects of this nature, you do not know exactly how a layout
or designed plan is going to look or feel until you physically are on site, particularly in
our case and with how difficult the site constraints are for this project. Seeing as we
started our project nearly 2 years ago, there have naturally been some changes and
modifications to our initial designs over that time. This request to our original approved
variance is one such instance.
To go back in time, we had gone into the design for the landscape and exterior of our
home initially thinking we would do a new paved patio surface and walkout terrace to
replace an existing structure and patio that had previously existed on lake side portion
of our home. However, in our review with city staff, concerns were raised about the
impact this new paved surface would potentially have on overall hardcover for the
project and the impact impervious surfacing could have with stormwater runoff on the
top of a manmade bluff that existed on our property (created by the original home
construction in 1999).
Owing to the restrictions on hardcover percentage overall, we ultimately opted to utilize
a more user-friendly, pervious paving at-grade composite decking material for our lower
City of Chanhassen
Community Development Department
Planning Division
7700 Market Blvd
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
level patio space. This product is sturdy, maintenance free, and provides us with the
necessary surfaclng to create a useable flat space on a steep sloped property while
making less of an impact on the site.
We soon came to realize however that the 12' width we originally proposed is not fully
conducive to how we intend to use this space and are respectfully requesting to
increase the size of our approved new at grade deck by an additional 2 feet (going from
1 2' width to 14' width). These two feet of additional decking are being requested by for
the following reasons:
SAFETY: First, this additional space provides more safety to family, friends and guest
using the deck and provides us with the necessary width for us to have an unobstructed
walkway to pass through the space as you navigate to the front of the home or down the
lake. Our original variance application and approved plan shows a 12-toot deck. While
this provides enough room for seating and functionality, it doesn't allow for an efficient
walk-through space to navigate up and down the slope around the home. We recently
became concerned with the width of the deck once the new deck and planned new
stairways were physically staked for our review a few weeks back (as we are beginning
to start construction). Seeing aspects of our design in a drawing format and then going
into the field with actual stakes and dimensions are two very different things. We want
to ensure that people are not tripping, losing their footing, or having to step off the deck
and walk on the steep sloped areas of the bluff while navigating our new deck space at
the lower level of our home.
USE: Second, the additional 2' in width fundamentally adds to the functionality and
utilization of the lakeside deck space. lt gives much needed level space that is
navigable, safe and functional on a steep sloped property where level, functional
outdoor space is at a premium.
BLUFF IMPACT: Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, the addition of two feet of
decking does not impact the top of the defined bluff as we still would be located outside
of the defined top of bluff line indicated on our plans. This two foot extension takes use
of the existing flat area already created by the previous home design, patio and existing
boulder retaining wall and would not require any tree removal, or grading. The two feet
of decking are a natural extension over ground that would otherwise not be usuable.
To accommodate for this additional decking, we have also made other adjustments to
the original design by reducing the amount decking originally proposed on the east side
of the home.
ln closing, we want to express that our amended variance request for a two-foot
extension is being done proactively before the project is to be completed completed
We are trying to comply with the City of Chanhassen and abiding by the stated
provisions of our already-approved variance, with this minor adjustment.
Thank you for your due consideration with our requested revision
Below is a summarv of the oreviouslv ADDTO ved va ri a nce a ool i c ation w ritten
iustification:
Overview and lntroduction
My name is Elise Bruner, and my husband, Brian, and our daughter, Sieglinde, reside at
6609 Horseshoe Curve in Chanhassen. I am writing this written justification on behalf of
myself and my family. By way of background, I grew up in Chanhassen on the very
same property that is cunently under review by the Planning Division. The name of the
parcel of land, Alicia Heights, is, in fact, named after my mother, Alicia. My childhood
home, now 6611 Horseshoe Curve, was the only home I knew. The property of 6609
was split and sold in 1999 and the new home was built where we are living presently.
As such, I have a very deep connection to this property.
Practical Difficulties
We understand that variances are requested when the strict enforcement of the
ordinance would cause a "practical difficulty" because of circumstances unique to the
property, such as when the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its
size, physical sunoundings, shape, or topography. ln consideration of all equities and
hardships in this case, we believe that our application wanants favorable discretion,
since everything we hope to do will improve the use of this property and reduce further
degradation of the property.
o Reasonableness
We confirm that as homeowners, we propose to use our property in a reasonable
manner. While we would like to use our property in a particularly reasonable way, we
cannot currently do so under the rules of the applicable ordinance.
At the current time, we do not have reasonable use of our lake property. With a
severely sloped property from the road to the house, and again from the front
side to lake, there are essentially two (2) limited flat areas on the lakeside for
family recreation, including:
1) lower patio area by the slider door that is accessible from our walk-out
home.
21 flat patio area by shoreline.
The rest of the land is not usable for quiet enjoyment beyond a nature-scape. To this
end, we wish to create livable space for reasonable use as follows:
o Build a lower-level deck patio ou ide the slider door that is directlv
accessible from our walkout home. There is currentl y nothing outside our
slider door other than dirt and weeds. Building a deck is a reasonable use and
extension of our home.
o Build a staircase from the lower-level deck D ati o to the lakeshore.We
currently have no easy access to the lake without concern for falling, tripping, or
losing one's balance. We have witnessed able-bodied friends slip while trying to
get down to the lake, and anyone with physical limitations would arguably not be
comfortable going down to the lake. Without an appropriate staircase, this will
continue to be a problem. The distance from our lower-level slider door to the
lakeshore is about 117 teel and has a 29.75-foot grade change. This is just over
a 25% slope.
Build a modular (removable oieces) shoreline deck oatio near the
lakeshore. This would comport with necessary setbacks and allow access for
maintenance of the utility line in thls area.
a
a
Our current problem is due to circumstances unique to this property and was not
caused by our actions. As noted by the enclosed photographs and topography, the
physical characteristics of our property present unique challenges due to the sloping
topography and limited accessible space for use.
When we purchased the property in 2016, the home, boulder retaining walls, lakeshore
platform, and lack of staircase were all pre-existing factors. ln 2019, we removed a 144
square-foot bump out on the lakeside of the house, as well as a deck that protruded
toward the lake 8 feet as part of an extensive home remodel that was approved by the
City of Chanhassen. Those structures are no longer present. However, without certain
reasonable improvements, the current state of the property is not sustainable for
enjoyable use over the long run.
U n iqueness
a Boulders rollinq down the hill - On June 21 , 2020, boulders that are present in
an already dilapidated retaining fall came loose and rolled dovvn the hill due to
the rains. The boulder retaining wall is no longer safe and has already caused
damage to the pre-existing shoreline platform. There are about 5 large boulders
that have already rolled down the hill. Please see enclosed pictures for proof.
We anticipate that without a new retaining wall, erosion and damage will
continue.
o Run off around the house and down the hill - Without an a ppropriate
drainage plan, sediment, rocks, etc. will continue to degrade the property and
ultimately go into the lake - which is what we remain concerned about.
Without improvements, the pre-existing susceptibilities of the property will only continue
to grow.
o Essential Character
Provided the variance is granted, the comprehensive plan will not alter the essential
character of our property or locality. The resulting structure of the boat house, as well
as the stairs and deck, will not be out of scale, out of place, or otherwise inconsistent
with the surrounding area. Please see enclosed photographs for similarly situated
staircases and boathouses on Lotus Lake.
Use of permeableLleeksurfaees will allow water to percolate into the soiltoa
a
filter out pollutants and recharge the water table. As noted in the enclosed
comprehensive plan, we intend to use permeable deck material on the lower-
level patio, staircase, and lakeshore deck to ensure that water is properly
channeled into the underlying soil, which will force slow percolation during
periods of heavy rainfall.
Use of Livinq Walls will a gain allow water to absorb into the soil and slow
erosion. As noted in the enclosed comprehensive plan, we intend to use a living
wall instead of the pre-existing boulder retaining wall. Living retaining walls
function just as a traditional stone or timber wall, and typically require much less
actual building material to construct. ln keeping with the plan, we hope to reduce
storm water runoff and erosion.
@ Application of fescue on the lakeside
slope is cunently present, as we have already had great success with the
The proposed comprehensive plan is more orotective of the environment than
what is currentlv present. Please consider the followinq:
product, but we will continue the seeding of the entire lakeside area accordingly.
The use of this product is environmentally friendly due to the relatively deep root
systems (4-9"), which enhance droughlresistance by reducing water loss and
reaching deeper water reserves. Due to the nature of the fescue, once planted, it
requires only minimal water and no chemical fertilizers or pesticides for proper
maintenance.
@The comprehensive plan seeks to preserve the
pre-existing tree canopy on the property. We do not wish to disrupt the beauty of
the mature trees that we have.
Conclusion
Thank you in advance for your due consideration of our request for a variance.
Sincerely,
Elise Bruner and Brian Bruner
1
Walters, MacKenzie
From:Elise R. Bruner <ebruner@brunerlawgroup.com>
Sent:Monday, June 21, 2021 2:05 PM
To:Walters, MacKenzie
Cc:Unmacht, Matt; Henricksen, Erik; Brian T. Bruner; Travis Van Liere; Danielle Jurichko
Subject:RE: 6609 Horseshoe Curve Variance
Importance:High
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
MacKenzie,
Good afternoon. We are following up with you and your staff concerning our pending variance application request.
Permit us to respond to your concerns as follows:
1. We very much appreciate the note that your office will recommend approval to the two-foot extension of the
walkout bamboo deck. Thank you for your due consideration and support of this modification.
2. We will REMOVE the proposed 9’ x 9’ aggregate maintenance area and retaining wall on the east side of the
house around the existing air conditioner. We proposed to replace the existing boulder retaining wall to match
the aesthetic of the house, but we will keep this area as is which does not impede into the bluff. This removes
64 square feet of overall hardcover.
3. Concerning the reconfiguration of the driveway, this modification is proposed to a) decrease the steepness of
the driveway’s slope, which will reduce potential weather-related accidents in winter b) create a softer vehicle
turnaround space, and c) align with the layout of the proposed deck staircase on the west side of the house.
In the end, these proposed modifications with the removal of the proposed maintenance area noted in #2 brings overall
hardcover on our property to 21.8%.
Thank you in advance for your due consideration of our variance application request.
We will be present at the July 6 meeting via phone, but please reach out to us with any further questions or concerns
before this time.
Regards,
2
Elise R. Bruner | biography
Partner/Lead Engagement Attorney
Member, American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA)
Member, International Medical Graduate (IMG)Taskforce
phone: 952-797-2619
fax: 612-435-9831
address: 5125 County Road 101, Suite 106, Minnetonka, MN 55345
email: ebruner@brunerlawgroup.com
video conference | instant message: sic:ebruner@brunerlawgroup.com
client portal: https://brunerlawgroup.casemgmtsys.com
web: http://www.brunerlawgroup.com
linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/elisebruner
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic mail message and any attached files may contain
information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure. If you are not the
intended recipient, the use, dissemination, distribution, or copying is prohibited and may be subject to
legal restriction or sanction. Please notify the sender by a new electronic mail of any unintended recipients
and delete the original message and any attachments without making any copies.
From: Walters, MacKenzie <MWalters@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2021 10:25 AM
To: Elise R. Bruner <ebruner@brunerlawgroup.com>; Brian T. Bruner <bbruner@brunerlawgroup.com>
Cc: Unmacht, Matt <MUnmacht@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Henricksen, Erik <EHenricksen@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>
Subject: 6609 Horseshoe Curve Variance
Elise,
Staff met to go over your submitted variance request yesterday and during our discussions a couple issues were raised
which we hope that you can further clarify:
1) Staff noticed that a 9x9 pad and associated retaining wall is being proposed off the east side of the house. This
pad and it’s retaining wall extend approximately 4’ across the top of the bluff. The pre-existing retaining wall
does not cross the bluff line and does not have any associated impervious surface. Your variance request does
not mention this new expansion and encroachment. Staff is hoping that you can relocate the proposed
equipment pad to avoid the need for a variance. In no circumstance will staff be able to recommend approval of
a variance allowing the pad and retaining wall to cross into the bluff.
If you wish to request that the pad and retaining wall be allowed in their current configuration and location, I
would encourage you to provide explicit justification as to why the proposed location, size, and design in
needed. Staff feels the proposed 9x9 pad is significantly larger than the minimum size required to accommodate
an air conditioning unit.
2) While the proposed design does reduce the properties lot cover by about 237 square feet from the noted pre-
existing lot cover, it increased the proposed lot cover by 427 square feet from the previously approved variance.
The increase to lot cover from the revised driveway configuration also significantly exceeds the amount of lot
cover reduced by removing the previously approved concrete window well. While this total is under the 25%
allowed and does not in and of itself require a variance, the significant reduction to pre-existing lot cover was
one of the reasons the City supported the first variance request. Staff would recommend submitting a short
supplemental clarifying why the change to the driveway’s configuration was required.
3
Overall, staff will be recommending approval of the 2’ increase in deck width with the condition that no portion of the
deck may cross the top of the bluff. Other changes like those to the orientation of the stairs and exact configuration of
the living wall systems will be noted, but will not require a variance. Again, staff will be recommending that a variance
not be given to accommodate the proposed 9x9 pad within the bluff on the east side of the house.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
MacKenzie
BRUNER RESIDENCE
VARIANCE APPLICATION REVISIONS
JUNE 4, 2021
L000
PROJECT INFORMATION
N/A
Sheet #Title
PRELIMINARY
PRICING SET
VARIANCE
APPLICATION
BID SET PERMIT SET CD SET
LANDSCAPE
REVISIONS
L000 PROJECT INFORMATION
L001 GENERAL NOTES
L009 EXISTING INCOMING SURVEY
L010 EXISTING CONDITIONS + REMOVALS PLAN
L011 OVERLAY DIAGRAM
L101 SITE PLAN
L102 SURFACING + WALLS PLAN
L103 SITE FURNISHINGS + LIGHTING PLAN
L201 GRADING PLAN
L401 LANDSCAPE PLAN
L501 WALL + SITE ELEMENT ELEVATIONS
L601 WALL, STAIR, + SURFACING DETAILS
L602 DRAINAGE + LIGHTING DETAILS
L603 SITE ELEMENT DETAILS
L607 PLANTING DETAILS
L609
EROSION CONTROL + TREE PROTECTION
DETAILS
L700 SCHEDULES + SPECIFICATIONS
SHEET INDEX
LOCATION MAP
SITE ADDRESS:
6609 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
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 CHANHASSEN, MN
OWNER:
BRIAN AND ELISE BRUNER
6609 HORSESHOE CURVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
GENERAL CONTRACTOR:
SURVEY INFO PROVIDED BY:
EGAN, FIELD & NOWAK, INC.
1229 TYLER STREET NE #100
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55413
T 612 466 3300
PROJECT INFO:
PROJECT SITE
A
ABV ABOVE
AD AREA DRAIN
ADA AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
ADJ ADJACENT
AGG AGGREGATE
ALGN ALIGNMENT
ALUM ALUMINUM
ANOD ANODIZED
APPROX APPROXIMATE
ARCH ARCHITECT, ARCHITECTURE
AVG AVERAGE
B
BB BALLED AND BURLAPPED
BC BACK OF CURB
BFFE BASEMENT FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION
BLDG BUILDING
BOC BOTTOM OF CURB
BOP BOTTOM OF POOL
BOR BOTTOM OF RAMP
BOS BOTTOM OF STAIR
BOT BOTTOM
BOW BOTTOM OF WALL
BTWN BETWEEN
C
CAL CALIPER
CAP CAPACITY
CB CATCH BASIN
CHAM CHAMFER
CIP CAST IN PLACE
CIVIL CIVIL ENGINEER
CJ CONTROL JOINT
CL CENTER LINE
CLR CLEAR, CLEARANCE
CM CENTIMETER
CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT
CO CLEAN OUT
COL COLUMN
COMP COMPOSITE, COMPACTED
CONC CONCRETE
COND CONDITION
CONIF CONIFEROUS
CONST CONSTRUCTION
CONT CONTINUOUS
CNTR CENTER
CF CUBIC FEET
CU CUBIC
CY CUBIC YARDS
D
D)DEEP, DEPTH
DBL DOUBLE
DECID DECIDUOUS
DEMO DEMOLISH, DEMOLITION
DET DETAIL
DIA DIAMETER
DIM/S DIMENSION/S
DN DOWN
DR DRAIN
DWG/S DRAWING/S
E
E EAST
EA EACH
EJ EXPANSION JOINT
EL ELEVATION
ELEC ELECTRICAL
EQ EQUAL
EQUIP EQUIPMENT
EST ESTIMATE
ETR EXISTING TO REMAIN
E.W.EACH WAY
EXP EXPOSED
EXT EXTERIOR
EXTG EXISTING
F
FDN FOUNDATION
F.F.FILTER FABRIC
FFE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION
FG FINISHED GRADE
FIN FINISH
FL FLOOR
FOB FACE OF BRICK
FOC FACE OF CONCRETE
FOW FACE OF WALL
FT FEET, FOOT
FTG FOOTING
FURN FURNISHING
FUT FUTURE
G
GA GAUGE
GALV GALVANIZED
GC GENERAL CONTRACTOR
GEN GENERAL, GENERATOR
GEO GEO-TECHNICAL
GL GLASS, GLAZING
H
H)HIGH/HEIGHT
HB HOSE BIB
HC HANDICAP
HDCP HANDICAP, HANDICAPPED
HDWD HARDWOOD
HDWR HARDWARE
HORIZ HORIZONTAL
H.P.HIGH POINT
HR HANDRAIL
HT HEIGHT
I
I.D.INSIDE DIAMETER, INSIDE DIMENSION
I.E.INVERT ELEVATION
IN INCH, INCHES
INCL INCLUDED
INSUL INSULATION
INT INTERIOR
INV INVERT ELEVATION
J
JST JOIST
JT JOINT
K
K.O.KNOCK OUT
L
L)LENGTH
L.A.LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
LB POUND
L.F.LINEAR FOOT
LOCN LOCATION
LOD LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
L.P.LOW POINT
LT LIGHT
M
MAINT MAINTAIN, MAINTENANCE
MAS MASONRY
MAT MATERIAL
MAX MAXIMUM
MECH MECHANICAL
MEMB MEMBRANE
MFR MANUFACTURER
MH MANHOLE
MIN MINIMUM
MISC MISCELLANEOUS
MTL METAL
N
N NORTH
N/A NOT APPLICABLE
N.F.C.NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
N.I.C.NOT IN CONTRACT
No.NUMBER
NOM NOMINAL
NTS NOT TO SCALE
O
OA OVERALL
O.C.ON CENTER
O.D.OUTSIDE DIAMETER, OUTSIDE DIMENSION
OFD OVERFLOW DRAIN
OH OVERHEAD
OHW ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
OPNG OPENING
OPP OPPOSITE
ORNM ORNAMENTAL
P
PA PLANTED AREA
PAR PARALLEL
PC POINT OF CURVATURE, PRECAST
PERF PERFORATED
PERP PERPENDICULAR
PL PLATE, PROPERTY LINE
PLYWD PLYWOOD
PNT PAINT
POB POINT OF BEGINNING
POI POINT OF INTERSECTION
POT POINT OF TANGENCY
PSF POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT
PSI POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH
PT POINT, PRESSURE TREATED
PU POLYURETHANE
PVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
PVMT PAVEMENT
PVR PAVER
Q
QTR QUARTER
QTY QUANTITY
R
R RISER, RELOCATE
R)RISER HEIGHT
RAD RADIUS
RD ROOF DRAIN
REBAR REINFORCING BAR
RECEPT RECEPTACLE
RECT RECTANGULAR
REF REFERENCE
REINF REINFORCED, REINFORCEMENT
REM REMOVE
REQD REQUIRED
RET RETAINING, RETURN
REV REVISION
RO ROUGH OPENING
ROW RIGHT OF WAY
RP RADIUS POINT
RT RIGHT
S
S SOUTH
SCHED SCHEDULE
SECT SECTION
SD STORM DRAIN
S.F.SQUARE FEET
SHT SHEET
SIM SIMILAR
SLR SEALER
SPEC SPECIFICATION
SPP SPECIES
SQ SQUARE
SS SANITARY SEWER
SST STAINLESS STEEL
ST STORM SEWER
STA STATION
STD STANDARD
STL STEEL
STRUCT STRUCTURE, STRUCTURAL
SURF SURFACE, SURFACING
S.Y.SQUARE YARD
SYM SYMMETRICAL
T
T)THICK
T&B TOP AND BOTTOM
TBC TOP OF BACK OF CURB
TBD TO BE DETERMINED
THR THRESHOLD
TOC TOP OF CURB, TOP OF CONCRETE
TOD TOP OF DECK
TOF TOP OF FOOTING
TOP TOP OF PAVING
TOPO TOPOGRAPHY
TOR TOP OF RAMP
TOS TOP OF STAIR
TOW TOP OF WALL
TRANS ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER
TSL TOP OF SLAB
TVLS TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
TYP TYPICAL
U
UTIL UTILITY
V
VAR VARIABLE, VARIES
VEH VEHICLE
VIF VERIFY IN FIELD
VERT VERTICAL
VOL VOLUME
W
W WEST
W)WIDE, WIDTH
W/WITH
W/O WITHOUT
WD WOOD
WL WATER LEVEL
WP WATERPROOF, WORK POINT
WS WATER SUPPLY
WT WEIGHT
WTR WATER
WWF WELDED WIRE FABRIC
WWM WELDED WIRE MESH
Y
YD YARD
SYMBOLS
AND
ANGLE
ARC LENGTH
@ AT
CENTER LINE
Ø DIAMETER
DEGREE
NUMBER, POUND
PER
PLUS/MINUS
PROPERTY LINE
SF
X X X X
LOD
OHW
SS
ST
LANDSCAPE LINELEGENDLANDSCAPESYMBOLLEGENDLANDSCAPEABBREVIATIONS
EXISTING SPOTELEVATION000.00
PROPOSED
SPOT ELEVATION
DET
SHT
DET
SHT
TRAFFIC
FLOW
X
EXISTING TREES
TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING TREES TO BE
SAVED AND PROTECTED
NEW DECIDUOUS TREE
NEW CONIFEROUS TREE
NEW SHRUB
NEW PERENNIAL/ANNUAL
CB RD AD
AIR CONDITIONER UNIT
CATCH BASIN, ROOF DRAIN,
OR AREA DRAIN
GAS METER
WATER METER
S
P.E.
GEN.GENERATOR
HOSE BIB
EXTERIOR
ELECTRICAL OUTLET
EXTERIOR LIGHT SWITCH
AC
HB
WTR
GAS
LIGHT FIXTURES
TRASH CONTAINER
PLANTER POT
SWING GATE
SHT
SHT
PUP-UP EMITTER
XP
XW
XE
XS
XL
XR
XF
X
XXX
XXX.XX
LOCN
POT
CONTOUR ELEVATION
DATUM ELEVATION
TRAFFIC FLOW ARROW
KEY NOTE
SHEET NOTE
EDGING TYPE
FENCING TYPE
LIGHTING TYPE
PAVING TYPE
REMOVAL
SITE ELEMENT
WALL TYPE
GROUNDCOVER TYPE
PLANTING REFERENCE
ALGN
POB
000.00
TOW
X
POINT OF BEGINNING
POINT OF ENTRY
AT BUILDING
1
REVISION CLOUD
REVISION NUMBER
PARALLEL
ALIGNMENT
QTY
SPP
ELEVATION CALLOUT
DETAIL CALLOUT
SECTION CALLOUT
MATCH LINE / CONTROL LINE
STRUCTURAL GRID LINE
AREA OF ENLARGEMENT
SYMMETRY
SPRINKLER HEADS
BREAK LINE
PAVING HATCH LEGEND
G
X
X
DET
SHT
PLANT HATCH LEGEND
SECTION/DETAIL HATCH LEGEND
XXX
PROPERTY LINE
RIGHT-OF-WAY
EASEMENT
SETBACK
CENTER LINE
SILT FENCE
TREE PROTECTION FENCE
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
ORDINARY HIGH WATER
MARK
DRAIN TILE
SANITARY SEWER
STORM SEWER
EXISTING CONTOURS
PROPOSED CONTOURS
XXX
90°180°270°360°
SLOPE-AT-SURFACE/
DRAINAGE FLOW ARROW
X.XX%
STAIRDNUP
ASPHALT SURFACING
UNIT PAVER (RUNNING BOND)
UNIT PAVER (HERRINGBONE)
DRY-SET UNIT PAVER
FLAGSTONE PAVING
AGGREGATE SURFACING
PAVING/SITE ELEMENT
TO BE REMOVED
GRASSPAVE POUROUS PAVER
RIPRAP
TURFSTONE PAVERS
MORTAR-SET UNIT PAVER
CONCRETE
ASPHALT
STONE, TYPE 1
STONE, TYPE 2
MORTAR
GRANULAR FILL
COMPACTED AGGREGATE
METAL
WOOD
DIMENSIONAL
LUMBER (SECTION)
PLANTING SOIL
EARTH (DISTURBED)
EARTH (COMPACTED
OR UNDISTURBED)
GRASSPAVE POROUS
GRASS PAVER
TURFSTONE
STONE, TYPE 3
NETLON ADVANCED
TURF SYSTEM
TURF
PLANTING AREA
GROUNDCOVER TYPE 1
GROUNDCOVER TYPE 2
GROUNDCOVER TYPE 3
CONCRETE SURFACING
SAND SURFACING
SAND
SEEDING TYPE 2
SEEDING TYPE 1
FESCUE
SITE AND LANDSCAPE
LOTUS LAKE
creation date:6/2/2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (
DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/2. DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L000.
dwglast saved:daniellejurichko June 3, 2021 10:48 AMThe designs shown and
described herein including all technical drawings,graphics and specifications thereof, are proprietary
and cannot be copied,duplicated or commercially exploited,
in whole or in part, without the express written permission
of Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. These are available for
limited review
and evaluation by clients, consultants, contractors,governement agencies, and vendors only in accordance with
this notice.Copyright 2021 Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. All rights reserved.
license no:I hereby certify that this plan, specification,
or
report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am
a duly Licensed Landscape
Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.43728 T R A V I S V A
N L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0 9 H O R S E S H O E C
U R V E C H A N H A S S E N , M
I N
N
E
S
O
T A 5
5
3 1 7
B R U N E
R R E S I D
E N C E Drawn By:Date:Scale:Drawing:Sheet:12/18/2020 DJ Rev #Description Date VARIANCE
APPLICATION 12/18/2020 VARIANCE APPLICATION
REVISIONS 6/4/
2021 N O T
L001
GENERAL NOTES
N/A
GENERAL NOTES
1.USE OF THE WORD 'CONTRACTOR' IN THE
DRAWINGS INDICATES BOTH 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 SUB-CONTRACTORS
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
TIMES AND SHALL RECORD ALL
MODIFICATIONS/CHANGES 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 REASONABLY INFERRED
FROM THE DRAWINGS IN PROVIDING THE
OWNER WITH COMPLETE SYSTEMS AND A
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 AND 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 CONTRACTOR'S
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
ACTIVITY. AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO ANY
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, THE CONTRACTOR
MUST CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT
800 252 1166 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 MNDOT 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
IN WRITING, A FINAL ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION
WITH THE OWNER AND LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT.
CODES
1.ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE LOCAL CODES AND
ALL OTHER GOVERNING AUTHORITIES HAVING
JURISDICTION.
2.APPLICABLE CODES: THIS PROJECT IS TO
COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN
MUNICIPAL CODE AND SUB-CODE
REQUIREMENTS AND STATE OF MINNESOTA
CODE REQUIREMENTS.
3.VERIFY IF THIS PROJECT WILL REQUIRE
SPECIAL REVIEW AND APPROVALS FROM THE
RILEY PURGATORY BLUFF CREEK WATERSHED
DISTRICT.
SUBMITTALS / SHOP DRAWINGS / SITE MOCK-UPS
1.CONTRACTOR IS TO PROVIDE SHOP
DRAWINGS AND FIELD MOCKUPS TO THE
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR FINAL REVIEW
AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
FOR THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: PAVING, WALLS,
FENCES, SPECIAL METAL FABRICATIONS &
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 WITH 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 AND STAKE ALL PROPERTY LINES AND
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 AND
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 WORK. 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, GUTTER, PLANT
MATERIALS, TURF, UTILITIES, OR OTHER SITE
ELEMENTS OUTSIDE THE LIMITS OF WORK
THAT ARE DAMAGED DUE TO THE
CONTRACTOR'S ACTS OR NEGLIGENCE WILL
BE AT THE CONTRACTOR'S 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 AND
IMPLEMENT ALL NPDES, SWPPP, 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 SLICING 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 IS 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.
9.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 IN ALL NEW CATCH
BASINS IMMEDIATELY AFTER CATCH BASIN
INSTALLATION.
10.ADJACENT STREETS, ALLEYS, AND
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 NOTICE 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 CONTRACTOR'S 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 CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS AND IT
WILL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY
TO MAKE THE NECESSARY REPAIRS. UPON
COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, CONTACT ALL
UTILITY OWNERS AND MAKE ARRANGEMENTS
FOR A FIELD INSPECTION TRIP BY A
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CONTRACTOR AND
REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UTILITY OWNERS
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 CONTRACTOR'S
EXPENSE TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.
17.ITEMS SHALL REMAIN UNTIL DESIGNATED FOR
REMOVAL. REMOVE DESIGNATION ITEMS
SHOWN 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 MATERIAL FROM
SALVAGED ITEMS AND REUSE AS DIRECTED
BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.
22.REMOVE DEMOLISHED MATERIALS FROM SITE.
DISPOSAL BY BURNING AND/OR BURYING IS
PROHIBITED. ALL UNSUITABLE MATERIAL AND
DEBRIS MUST BE DISPOSED OF IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
ANY 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 PLANT 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 AND 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 AND
VERIFY TREES TO BE SAVED. CONTRACTOR
MUST REVIEW THE DRAWINGS AND DAILY
WORK SCHEDULE SO THAT, SHOULD
PROPOSED GRADES POSE A HAZARD TO A
TREE TO BE SAVED', THE CONTRACTOR'S
WORK IS NOT IMPEDED AND THERE WILL BE
TIME TO STUDY THE ISSUE.
3.WHERE EXISTING TREES AND/OR SIGNIFICANT
SHRUB MASSINGS 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
AND/OR ARE IN AN AREA TO BE 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 PLAN SHALL BE PROTECTED BY 6’
HEIGHT CHAIN LINK FENCING. THE FENCE
SHALL BE LOCATED AT A MINIMUM AROUND
THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE FOR ALL TREES
SEE TREE PROTECTION FENCING DETAILS).
THE FENCE SHALL BE FIRMLY ANCHORED INTO
THE GROUND AND SHALL REMAIN UPRIGHT
AND INTACT UNTIL ALL CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE. BARRIER FENCES
MAY BE USED TO PROTECT TREES OUTSIDE
OF THE MAIN CONSTRUCTION AREAS.
BARRIER FENCES SHALL CONSIST OF
SAFETY-CAPPED REBAR POSTS PLACED NO
MORE THAN 8 FEET ON CENTER WITH 4 FOOT
HIGH ORANGE SQUARE MESH BARRIER
FENCING, RESINET SLM40, OR EQUAL,
ATTACHED TO POSTS. BARRIER FENCE MUST
BE INSTALLED AT THE LIMITS OF THE
DRIP-LINE 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 STAKE 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 ARBORIST’S
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 CAN 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 BE APPROVED BY
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ANY
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
AXE OR PRUNER. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT OF ANY 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 ACTIVITY 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 AND STOCKPILE
ON SITE FOR USE AT A LATER DATE.
2.CONDUCT A SOIL EVALUATION OF EXISTING
STOCKPILED TOPSOIL TO BE USED TO
DETERMINE THE SOILS COMPOSITION,
COMPACTION RATE, NUTRIENT QUALITIES,
ORGANIC CONTENT, PH LEVELS AND WATER
HOLDING CAPABILITIES. THE IDEAL 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”.
DECOMPACTING OF SMALLER PLANTING
AREAS SUCH AS PARKING AREAS AND
AROUND STRUCTURES, MAY REQUIRE THE
REMOVAL OF COMPACTED SOILS TO A DEPTH
OF 18” OR MORE AND THEN REPLACEMENT
WITH NEW OR AMENDED SOILS. REMOVAL ALL
DEBRIS 2” OR GREATER FROM NEW OR
AMENDED SOILS.
5.WHEN PERFORMING SOIL DECOMPACTION,
MULTIPLE PASSES ACROSS THE AREA MAY 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 ROTO-TILLER 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 MIXED
THOROUGHLY WITH EXISTING SOIL. AN
ADDITIONAL SOIL TEST SHALL BE TAKEN 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 AND LAYOUT THE
PROPOSED WORK FOR CONSTRUCTION. THE
CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY
GRADES, LINES, LEVELS, DIMENSIONS PRIOR
TO COMMENCING WITH WORK. NOTED
DIMENSIONS TAKE 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 AND 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 AND
RELATED WORK, REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL
DRAWINGS
4.WHERE DIMENSIONS ARE 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 / BENCH
MARKS. DIMENSIONS TO CENTER LINE ARE AS
INDICATED.
6.INSTALL INTERSECTING ELEMENTS AT 90
DEGREE ANGLES TO EACH OTHER UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED.
7.PROVIDE EXPANSION JOINTS WHERE
CONCRETE FLAT WORK MEETS VERTICAL
STRUCTURES SUCH AS WALLS, CURBS, STEPS
AND 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 (20’-0” O.C.) MAXIMUM OR AS INDICATED
ON THE PLANS.
10.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 FIELD.
GRADING NOTES
1.EXCAVATION, BACKFILL AND COMPACTION
SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
RECOMMENDATIONS.
2.PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN POSITIVE DRAINAGE
AWAY FROM ALL STRUCTURES AT 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 AND PLANTING
MATERIALS IN DETERMINING EARTHWORK
REQUIREMENTS
5.GRADING OPERATIONS MUST MINIMIZE THE
POTENTIAL FOR EROSION.
6.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.
8.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 CONTRACTOR'S
EXPENSE.
9.NO TOPSOIL SHALL BE REMOVED FROM
SEEDING AND/OR RESTORATION AREAS
WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT.
10.TOPSOIL COMPACTED BY CONSTRUCTION
TRAFFIC IN SEEDING AND/ 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 &
PERENNIAL BED AREAS SHALL BE AMENDED
AT A RATE OF 8 CUBIC FEET PER THOUSAND
SQUARE FEET OF NITROGEN STABILIZED
ORGANIC AMENDMENT AND 10 LBS. OF
12-12-12 FERTILIZER PER CU. YD.,
ROTO-TILLED TO A 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
1.ALL SEEDED AREAS SHALL BE WARRANTED BY
THE CONTRACTOR FOR A 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 AND SEEDING RATE
SHALL BE AS LISTED ON SEEDING KEY.
5.NO SEEDING MATERIAL SUBSTITUTIONS WILL
BE ACCEPTED UNLESS THE CONTRACTOR,
PRIOR TO THE SUBMISSION OF A BID AND/OR
QUOTATION, REQUESTS APPROVAL OF THE
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.
6.THE SEEDING / RESTORATION CONTRACTOR
SHALL KEEP NEWLY SEEDED AREAS WATERED
FOR A 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 /
RESTORATION CONTRACTOR MUST ALSO
PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A BID FOR
INDIVIDUAL 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.
8.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 PLANT 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 /
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 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.
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 OF12
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 AND
FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS.
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).
8.WHERE LAWN / SOD ABUTS PAVED SURFACES,
FINISHED GRADE OF SOD MUST BE HELD 1
INCH BELOW THE SURFACE ELEVATION OF
THE PAVED SURFACE.
9.SOD SHALL BE LAID 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 MAKE ADJUSTMENTS
TO LOCATIONS PRIOR TO PLANTING.
11.ALL PROPOSED PLANTS SHALL BE STAKED AS
SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS AND/OR 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 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE
DELIVERY DATE FOR ALL PLANT MATERIAL.
12.PAINT OR 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 PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE CLEARLY
IDENTIFIED (COMMON OR LATIN
NOMENCLATURE) WITH A PLASTIC TAG WHICH
SHALL NOT BE REMOVED PRIOR TO THE
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S APPROVAL.
14.ALL PLANTING STOCK SHALL MEET AND
CONFORM TO “THE 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.
16.ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE FERTILIZED
UPON INSTALLATION WITH DRIED BONE MEAL
OR OTHER FERTILIZER AS INDICATED MIXED IN
WITH THE PLANTING 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, AND 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 ANY OTHER SITE
CONDITIONS WHICH MIGHT NEGATIVELY
AFFECT PLANT MATERIAL ESTABLISHMENT,
SURVIVAL, 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
SUBMISSION OF A BID AND/OR 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 PLANS. ALL PLANT
MATERIAL SHALL MEET SIZE 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 AND 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 AND A HEIGHT OF EIGHT (8) FEET
FOR THAT PORTION OF THE PLAN LOCATED
OVER THE SIDEWALK AND/OR ROAD.
25.PRUNE NEWLY PLANTED 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 #CT-125, AS MANUFACTURED BY
NORTH AMERICAN GREEN (OR EQUAL).
INSTALL AND STAKE PER MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS.
29.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A WRITTEN
REQUEST FOR THE OWNER ACCEPTANCE
INSPECTION UPON COMPLETION OF ALL
PLANTING WORK
30.PLANTING IN SEEDING AND/OR 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
QUALITY, AUTOMATIC CONTROL VALVES,
CONTROLLERS AND OTHER NECESSARY
IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT. ALL COMPONENTS
SHALL BE NON-CORROSIVE MATERIALS. ALL
DRIP SYSTEMS SHALL BE ADEQUATELY
FILTERED AND REGULATED PER THE
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 AND SPRAY HEADS (WHEREVER
POSSIBLE), RAIN SENSORS, AND
MULTI-PROGRAM 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 AND /
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.
8.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 BACKFLOW
PREVENTER, AND OTHER CODE REQUIRED
PLUMBING ELEMENTS MUST BE PROVIDED BY
A LICENSED MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR.
9.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 W/
APPLICABLE TRADES.
10.THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR MUST PROVIDE
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUALS
AND ON-SITE INSTRUCTION TO THE OWNER IN
THE SYSTEM OPERATION. THE IRRIGATION
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 /
RESTORATION AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE
INDICATED.IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR SHALL
COORDINATE WITH SEEDING / RESTORATION
CONTRACTOR REGARDING IRRIGATION
SYSTEM SCHEDULE AND IRRIGATION NEEDS IN
RESTORATION AREAS.
12.ALL SPRAY AND ROTOR HEAD LOCATIONS
SHALL BE STAKED, FLAGGED AND/OR
OTHERWISE CLEARLY MARKED 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. STAKED
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.ADJUST 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 ANY
DIFFERENCES IN WATER PRESSURE
READINGS AT IRRIGATION POINT OF
CONNECTION PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH
IMPLEMENTATION OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM.
16.IF 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 AS-BUILT DRAWING OF FINAL
IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO OWNER / 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
8-1/2"x11" ZONE MAP TO BE PLACED INSIDE
EACH CONTROLLER BOX.
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 PLAN 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 SHALL 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 AND THEIR
LOCATIONS.
5.COORDINATE SWITCHING 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 AND 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.I.-PROTECTED FOR USE WITH
TRANSFORMERS THAT UTILIZE A PLUG-IN
CORD. ALL RECEPTACLE BOXES SHOULD
UTILIZE AN “IN-USE” 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
NATIVE SPECIES TARGETED FOR REMOVAL
WILL BE REMOVED BY HAND 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 AND 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 WITH A DRAG
HARROW.
8.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) FOR A MINIMUM OF
FOUR WEEKS OR UNTIL SEED IS ESTABLISHED.
ALL WATERING ASSUMES A SYSTEM
COVERING ALL RESTORATION AREAS IS IN
PLACE AND RESTORATION CONTRACTOR HAS
CONTROL OVER WATERING SCHEDULE FOR
RESTORATION AREAS.
10.PLANTINGS SHALL BE PLACED ACCORDING TO
SPECIFIC ZONE SECTION NEEDS AND NOT
ACCORDING TO A 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 AND PLANTING
WORK.
WARRANTY
1.ALL HARDSCAPE AND PAVING AREAS TO BE
WARRANTED FOR 1 YEAR AFTER OWNER
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 / 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
1.BUILDING CODE: CONFORM TO LATEST
EDITION OF STATE BUILDING CODE AND
INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC).
2.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MEANS AND METHODS
OF CONSTRUCTION AND 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 AND
TO WITHSTAND ALL LOADS TO WHICH THE
STRUCTURE MAY BE SUBJECTED. SUCH
MEASURES SHALL BE LEFT IN PLACE AS LONG
AS REQUIRED FOR SAFETY AND 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’-0”. 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.
8.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
PLACING 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
REQUIREMENTS FOR STRUCTURAL
CONCRETE (ACI 318), LATEST ADOPTION
10.2.CONCRETE MIXES SHALL BE DESIGNED
PER ACI 301 USING THE FOLLOWING
PARAMETERS:
10.2.a.PORTLAND CEMENT CONFORMING
TO ASTM C150 OR C595.
10.2.b.AGGREGATE CONFORMING TO ASTM
C33.
10.2.c.ADMIXTURES CONFORMING TO
ASTM C494, C1017, AND C260. DO
NOT USE CALCIUM CHLORIDE OR
ADMIXTURES CONTAINING CALCIUM
CHLORIDE.
10.2.d.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 AND
REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH ACI AND CRSI
STANDARDS.
11.3.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, EPOXY COATED OR
STAINLESS STEEL FOR UNCOATED STEEL. BAR
SUPPORTS FOR COATED STEEL SHALL BE
PLASTIC, PLASTIC COATED OR EPOXY
COATED.
16.CONCRETE MIX DESIGN(S) SHALL BE
SUBMITTED TO ENGINEER/ARCHITECT FOR
REVIEW.
17.PROVIDE REINFORCING STEEL SHOP
DRAWINGS TO ENGINEER / LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW / APPROVAL.
18.MATERIAL STRENGTHS:
LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION NOTES
DESCRIPTION
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH (fc)
AT 28 DAYS
MAX
AGGREGATE
SIZE
SLUMP
MAX WATER
TO CEMENT
RATIOS
W/C)3/
FOOTINGS 3,000 PSI 1 1/2"4" ± 1"0.57
RETAINING
WALLS (5%
AIR
ENTRAINED)
4,000 PSI 3/4"4" ± 1"0.45
1 / TOLERANCE ON AIR CONTENT AS DELIVERED
SHALL BE ± 1.5%
2/ PRIOR TO THE ADDITION OF PLASTICIZER OR
HIGH-RANGE WATER-REDUCER
1 / TOLERANCE ON AIR CONTENT AS DELIVERED
SHALL BE ± 1.5%
creation date:6/2/2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (
DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/2. DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L001.
dwglast saved:daniellejurichko June 2, 2021 4:43 PMThe designs shown and
described herein including all technical drawings,graphics and specifications thereof, are proprietary
and cannot be copied,duplicated or commercially exploited,
in whole or in part, without the express written permission
of Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. These are available for
limited review
and evaluation by clients, consultants, contractors,governement agencies, and vendors only in accordance with
this notice.Copyright 2021 Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. All rights reserved.
license no:I hereby certify that this plan, specification,
or
report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am
a duly Licensed Landscape
Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.43728 T R A V I S V A
N L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0 9 H O R S E S H O E C
U R V E C H A N H A S S E N , M
I N
N
E
S
O
T A 5
5
3 1 7
B R U N E
R R E S I D
E N C E Drawn By:Date:Scale:Drawing:Sheet:12/18/2020 DJ Rev #Description Date VARIANCE
APPLICATION 12/18/2020 VARIANCE APPLICATION
REVISIONS 6/4/
2021 N O T
HORS E S H O E C U R V E
6609 H O R S E S H O E C U R V E
LOTUS LAKE
EXISTING INCOMINGSURVEY1 L009
EXISTING INCOMING SURVEY
N
1" = 16'
SCALE: 1 inch =
0 16'32'8'
16 feet
creation date:6/2/2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (
DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/2. DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L009.
dwglast saved:daniellejurichko June 2, 2021 4:43 PMThe designs shown and
described herein including all technical drawings,graphics and specifications thereof, are proprietary
and cannot be copied,duplicated or commercially exploited,
in whole or in part, without the express written permission
of Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. These are available for
limited review
and evaluation by clients, consultants, contractors,governement agencies, and vendors only in accordance with
this notice.Copyright 2021 Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. All rights reserved.
license no:I hereby certify that this plan, specification,
or
report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am
a duly Licensed Landscape
Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.43728 T R A V I S V A
N L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0 9 H O R S E S H O E C
U R V E C H A N H A S S E N , M
I N
N
E
S
O
T A 5
5
3 1 7
B R U N E
R R E S I D
E
N C
E Drawn By:Date:Scale:Drawing:Sheet:
12/18/2020 DJ Rev #Description Date VARIANCE
APPLICATION 12/18/2020 VARIANCE
APPLICATION REVISIONS 6/4/2021 NOTE:GENERAL
NOTES 1.SEE SHEET L001 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.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 ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
8.AUTOCAD
FILE AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTOR UPON REQUEST FOR FIELD
LAYOUT.KEYNOTES 1.EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE(S)
TYP. - 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 DOCK BY OWNER, REORIENT TO ALIGN WITH
PATH, STAIRS 5.FOOTPRINT OF EXISTING
LAKESIDE PAVING AND
DECK N O T
EXISTING GARAGE
REFER TO ARCH
936.33
HORSESHOE CURVE
5' SIDE
YARD SETBACKTRAFFIC
FLOW
TRAFFIC
FLOW
5'
SIDE
YARD
SETBACKNEIGHBORING
STRUCTURE
NEIGHBORING
STRUCTURE
1
1
1
1
1 2
2
2 2
3
926.90
BFFE EXISTING
PORCH
ABOVE EXISTING HOUSE
937.
08
FFE REFER TO ARCH TYP.TYP.EXISTI N G S A NI T A R Y SE
W E
R
LI N
EPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE 1
LOTUS
LAKE
O.H.W.: 896.
30 1 4 10' FRONT YARD SETBACK 10' OH W
S E
T
B
A
C
K
SS
EASEMENT
WILDFLOWER
GARDEN
1R
1R
2R
2R
2R
2R
3R
4R
5R 2R 5R 5R5R 5R
5R EXISTINGCONDITIONSAND
REMOVALS
PLAN1 L010
EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDREMOVALS
PLAN N 1" = 16'
SCALE: 1
inch =0
16'32'8'16 feet REMOVALS KEY
R1 EXISTING BITUMINOUS DRIVE TO BE REMOVED
R2 EXISTING SITE WALL TO BE
REMOVED R3 EXISTING PAVING TO BE
REMOVED R4 EXISTING DECK TO BE
REMOVED
R5 EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED R creation date:6/
2/2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/
2. DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L010.dwglast saved:daniellejurichko June 3,
2021 10:49 AMThe designs shown and described herein including all technical
drawings,graphics and specifications thereof, are proprietary and
cannot be copied,duplicated or commercially exploited, in whole or
in part, without the express written permission of Travis Van
Liere Studio,
LLC. These are available for limited review and evaluation by clients, consultants, contractors,governement
agencies, and vendors only in accordance with this notice.Copyright 2021 Travis
Van Liere Studio, LLC. All rights reserved.license no:
I
hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under
my direct supervision and
that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.43728 T
R A V I S V A N L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0 9 H O R
S E S H O E C U R V E C H A N
H A
S
S
E
N ,
M I N
N
E S O
T A 5 5 3
1 7 B R U N
E
R R
E S I D E N C
E Drawn By:Date:Scale:Drawing:Sheet:12/
18/2020 DJ Rev #Description
Date VARIANCE APPLICATION 12/18/2020 VARIANCE
APPLICATION REVISIONS 6/4/2021 NOTE:
GENERAL NOTES 1.SEE SHEET L001
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.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 ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.8.AUTOCAD FILE
AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTOR UPON REQUEST FOR FIELD
LAYOUT.KEYNOTES 1.EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE(S) TYP. - 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
DOCK BY OWNER, REORIENT TO ALIGN
WITH PATH, STAIRS
5.FOOTPRINT OF EXISTING
5'
SIDE
YARD
SETBACK5'
SIDE
YARD
SETBACK1
1
1
1
1 2 2 2 2 3 DNEXISTI N G S A NI T A R Y S E
W
E
R
LI N E 1
1 4 10' FRONT YARD SETBACK 10' OH W S
E T
BA C
K SS
EASEMENT
OVERLAY DIAGRAM1
L011 OVERLAY DIAGRAM
N 1" = 16'SCALE:
1 inch =
0 16'
32'8'16 feet EXISTING HARDCOVER
EXISTING HOUSE 2,985 s.f.
EXISTING DRIVEWAY 2,684 s.
f.EXISTING PAVING 305 s.
f.EXISTING WALLS 403 s.f.AREA
OF PROPERTY 27,878 s.f.EXISTING
HARDCOVER AREA 6,
377 s.f.EXISTING HARDCOVER 23%HARDCOVER / PROPERTY
AREA RATIO
ALLOWED BY CODE 25%PROPOSED HARDCOVER
EXISTING HOUSE 2,929 s.f.PROPOSED
DRIVEWAY + AUTOCOURT 3,038 s.f.
PROPOSED AGGREGATE EDGING 157 s.
f.PROPOSED WALLS
16 s.
f.AREA
OF PROPERTY 27,878 s.f.PROPOSED
HARDCOVER AREA 6,
140 s.f.PROPOSED HARDCOVER 22%HARDCOVER / PROPERTY
AREA RATIO ALLOWED BY CODE 25%creation date:6/2/
2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/2.
DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L011.dwglast saved:daniellejurichko June 2, 2021
4:42 PMThe designs shown and described herein including all technical drawings,
graphics and specifications thereof, are proprietary and cannot
be copied,duplicated or commercially exploited, in whole or in
part, without the express written permission of Travis Van Liere
Studio, LLC.
These are available for limited review and evaluation by clients, consultants, contractors,governement agencies,
and vendors only in accordance with this notice.Copyright 2021 Travis Van
Liere Studio, LLC. All rights reserved.license no:I
hereby
certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my
direct supervision and that
I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.43728 T R
A V I S V A N L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0 9 H O R S
E S H O E C U R V E C H A N H
A S
S
E
N ,
M
I N N
E
S O T
A 5 5 3 1
7 B R U N E
R
R E
S I D E N C E
Drawn By:Date:Scale:Drawing:Sheet:12/18/
2020 DJ Rev #Description Date
VARIANCE APPLICATION 12/18/2020 VARIANCE APPLICATION
REVISIONS 6/4/2021 NOTE:GENERAL
NOTES 1.SEE SHEET L001 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.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
ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.8.AUTOCAD FILE AVAILABLE
TO CONTRACTOR UPON REQUEST FOR FIELD LAYOUT.
KEYNOTES 1.EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE(S) TYP. - 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 DOCK
BY OWNER, REORIENT TO ALIGN WITH
PATH, STAIRS 5.
FOOTPRINT OF EXISTING LAKESIDE
EXISTING GARAGE
REFER TO ARCH
936.33
HORSESHOE CURVE
5' SIDE
YARD SETBACKTRAFFIC
FLOW
TRAFFIC
FLOW
5'
SIDE
YARD
SETBACKNEIGHBORING
STRUCTURE
NEIGHBORING
STRUCTURE
1
1
1
1
1 2
2
2 2
3
DN926.90
BFFE EXISTING
PORCH
ABOVE EXISTING HOUSE
937.
08
FFE REFER TO ARCH TYP.TYP.POBEXISTI N G S A NI T A R Y SE
W E
R
LI N
EPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE 1
LOTUS
LAKE
O.
H.W.: 896.30
1 4 AC 10' FRONT YARD SETBACK 10' OH W
S E
T
B
A
C
K SS
EASEMENT
WILDFLOWER
GARDEN
HB
DN
DN
DN RISR
DN3
RISR
DN3 RISR
DN3
55'-10"10'
2'
4'
12'-
8"6
EQ.
6'43'
O.C.
2'1'
11
2
2
51'9'-
4"37EQ.36'84'
13 EQ.
2',
TYP.
3'-
6"
1'-
8"
9'
1'
TYP.
4
3'-
7"
10'-
7"
20'-5"
13'-
6"
9'-
5"
6'-
1"
35'
1'-
6"9'
9'-3"
TYP.4'74'2'TYP.
4'TYP.R
8 T
Y P
R12'29'13'
4'4'2'4'
4'TYP.
2'-7"
76'-7"1 L501
2L501
3L5014L5017
L501
11'
20'-5"PROPERTY
LINE OHW ORDINARY HIGH WATER
MARK SITE
PLAN1 L101 SITE
PLAN 1" = 16'
SCALE: 1 inch =
0
16'32'8'16
feet
CONTOUR
ELEVATIONXXX POB POINT OF BEGINNING PROPOSED CONTOURSXXX EXISTING CONTOURSXX X
TRAFFIC FLOW TRAFFIC FLOW ARROW EXISTING TREE TO BE SAVED
AND PROTECTED DECID.CONIF.ORNM.PROPOSED NEW TREE DECID.CONIF.ORNM.SETBACK
EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION000.00X LEGEND N creation date:6/3/2021filepath:/Users/
daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/2.
DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L101.dwglast saved:daniellejurichko June
3, 2021 10:46 AMThe designs shown and described herein
including all
technical drawings,graphics and specifications thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied,duplicated or
commercially exploited, in whole or in part, without the express written permission
of Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. These are available
for
limited review and evaluation by clients, consultants, contractors,governement agencies, and vendors only in
accordance with this notice.
Copyright 2021 Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. All rights reserved.license no:I hereby certify that this plan,
specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws
of the State of Minnesota.43728 T R A V I S V A N
L I
E
R
E
date:
1/23/2018
6
6 0 9
H O R S E
S H O E C U
R
V E
C H A N H A S
S E N , M I N N E
S O T A 5
5 3 1 7 B R U
N E R R E S
I D E N C E
Drawn By:Date:Scale:Drawing:Sheet:12/18/2020
DJ Rev #Description Date VARIANCE
APPLICATION 12/18/2020 VARIANCE APPLICATION REVISIONS
6/
4/2021 NOTE:GENERAL NOTES 1.SEE SHEET
L001 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.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 ARCHITECT PRIOR
TO CONSTRUCTION.8.AUTOCAD FILE AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTOR UPON REQUEST FOR FIELD LAYOUT.KEYNOTES 1.EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE(
S) TYP. - 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 DOCK
BY
OWNER, REORIENT TO ALIGN WITH PATH,
STAIRS 5.FOOTPRINT OF EXISTING LAKESIDE PAVING AND DECK
N
O
T
F
CB
CB
CB CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
EXISTING GARAGE
REFER TO ARCH
936.33
HORSESHOE CURVE
5' SIDE
YARD SETBACKTRAFFIC
FLOW
TRAFFIC
FLOW
5'
SIDE
YARD
SETBACKNEIGHBORING
STRUCTURE
NEIGHBORING
STRUCTURE
1
1
1
1
1 2
2 2
2 3
P.
E.1.
50%
2.42%
DN926.90
BFFE
EXISTING PORCH ABOVE
EXISTING
HOUSE
937.
08 FFE REFER TO ARCH TYP.TYP.CB EXISTI N G S A NI T A R Y
S E
W E
RLI
N E
P.E.PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY
LINE
119%
CB
LOTUS
LAKE
O.H.W.: 896.
30 1 4 CB CB AC 1:610' FRONT YARD
SETBACK 10' OH
W S E
T B
A
C K
TOS:
936.92
BOS:
936.33
928.
50 BOS
932.
50 TOW
932.
00 TOS
933.
75 TOS
935.
50
TOS
925.
00
TOS
930.
25
TOS
SS
EASEMENT
WILDFLOWER
GARDEN
HB934933935936954
953
952
951
950
949
948
947
946
945
944
943
942
941
940 939
926
924
922
920
918
916 936
937 938
932929931928927923.
25 TOS
900
901 899
898 926.
75
936.33
RIM
934.25
BOW
926.75
927.
83 BOD
926.
17 BOD
925.
75 RIM
925.
75 RIM
925.
75 RIM
926.
75 RIM
936.
33 RIM
919.
75 TOS
918.
00 TOS
916.
25 TOS
914.
50 TOS
912.
75 TOS
911.00
TOS
909.25
TOS
907.50
TOS
936.33
925.75 RIM 930.
00 BOW
930.
00 BOW
932.
00 BOW935.
50
936.00
921.
25
TOS
934.
50
TOW
905.
75
TOS
904.
00
TOS
915
914
913
912 911
910
909 908
907
906 905
904
903
902
934.
00 BOW
929.
33
BOW
929.
00
CB
CB CB
930DN
DN DN
RISR
DN3 RISR
DN3
RISR DN3
899.
92
BOD
926.
75
BOS
926.
17
BOD
928.
50
TOS
4
4
4
4
BEYOND
BEYOND
2
1
1
3
1
3
1
1
1
5
5
5
6
6
L609
1 8 L6029 L602
11 L60210
L602
1 L603
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
PLAN1 L201 GRADINGAND
DRAINAGEPLAN N
1" = 16'
SCALE: 1 inch =0 16'
32'8'
16 feet PROPERTY LINE OHWORDINARYHIGH
WATER MARK CONTOUR ELEVATIONXXX
SLOPE-AT-
SURFACE/DRAINAGE
FLOW ARROWX.XX%
POB POINT OF
BEGINNING DRAIN
TILE PROPOSED CONTOURSXXX XXX EXISTING
CONTOURS
NEW
PERENNIAL/ANNUAL PERENNIAL
GRASS POINT OF ENTRY AT
BUILDING TRAFFIC
FLOW TRAFFIC FLOW
ARROW EXISTING TREE
TO BE SAVED
AND PROTECTEDDECID.CONIF.
ORNM.
PROPOSED
NEW TREEDECID.CONIF.
ORNM.PROPOSED
SPOT
ELEVATIONXXX.XX LOCN
SETBACK EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION000.00X STAIRDN UP
LEGEND CB RD AD CATCH BASIN, ROOF DRAIN, OR AREA
DRAIN creation date:6/2/2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/
PROJECTS (DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/2. DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L201.dwglast
saved:daniellejurichko June 3, 2021 11:01 AMThe designs shown and described
herein including all technical drawings,graphics and specifications
thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied,duplicated or commercially
exploited, in whole or in part, without the express written
permission of
Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. These are available for limited review and evaluation by
clients, consultants, contractors,governement agencies, and vendors only in accordance with this
notice.Copyright 2021 Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. All
rights
reserved.license no:I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared
by me or under
my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State
of Minnesota.43728 T R A V I S V A N L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0
9 H O R S E S H O E C U R V E
C H
A
N
H
A
S S E
N ,
M I N
N E S O T
A 5 5 3 1 7
B
R U
N E R R E S I
D E N C E Drawn By:Date:
Scale:Drawing:Sheet:12/18/
2020 DJ Rev #Description Date VARIANCE APPLICATION
12/18/2020 VARIANCE APPLICATION REVISIONS
6/4/2021 NOTE:GENERAL NOTES
1.SEE SHEET L001 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.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 ARCHITECT PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION.8.AUTOCAD FILE AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTOR
UPON REQUEST FOR FIELD LAYOUT.KEYNOTES 1.EXISTING SIGNIFICANT
TREE(S)
TYP. - 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 DOCK BY
OWNER, REORIENT TO
ALIGN WITH PATH, STAIRS
5.FOOTPRINT OF EXISTING LAKESIDE PAVING AND DECK
N O T F O R C O N S
T R U C T I O N 211 1ST
STREET NORTH, SUITE 350 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 t 612 345
4275 Standard Erosion Control Notes for RPBCWD Development Reviews C1.The
erosion control plan must include the following notes:a. Natural topography and soil conditions must be protected,
including retention onsite
of native topsoil to the greatest extent possible.b. Additional measures, such as
hydraulic mulching and other practices as specified by the District must be
used on slopes of 3:1 (H:V) or
steeper to provide adequate stabilization.c. Final site stabilization measures
must specify that at least six inches of topsoil or
organic
matter be spread and incorporated into the underlying soil during final
site treatment wherever topsoil has been removed.d. Construction site
waste such as discarded building materials, concrete truck washout, chemicals,
litter and sanitary waste must be properly managed.e. All temporary erosion
and sediment
control BMPs must be maintained until completion of construction and
vegetation is established sufficiently to ensure stability of the site,
as determined by the District.f. All temporary erosion and sediment control
BMPs must be removed upon final stabilization.g. Soil surfaces compacted during construction and remaining pervious
upon completion of construction must be decompacted to
achieve a soil compaction testing pressure of less than 1,400 kilopascals
or 200 pounds per square inch in the upper 12 inches
of the soil profile while taking care to protect utilities,
tree roots, and other existing vegetation.h. All disturbed areas must be
stabilized within 7 calendar days after land-disturbing work has temporarily
or permanently ceased on a property that drains to an impaired water, within
14 days elsewhere.i. The permittee must, at a minimum,
inspect, maintain and repair all disturbed surfaces and all erosion and
sediment control facilities and soil stabilization measures every day work is performed
on the site and at least weekly
until land-disturbing activity has ceased. Thereafter, the permittee must perform these
responsibilities at least weekly until vegetative cover is established. The permittee will
maintain a log of activities under this section for inspection by
the District on request.
AIS
Note
for
RPBCWD
EXISTING GARAGE
REFER TO ARCH
936.33
HORSESHOE CURVE
5' SIDE
YARD SETBACKTRAFFIC
FLOW
TRAFFIC
FLOW
5'
SIDE
YARD
SETBACKNEIGHBORING
STRUCTURE
NEIGHBORING
STRUCTURE
1
1
1
1
1 2
2
2 2
3
DN926.90
BFFE EXISTING
PORCH
ABOVE EXISTING HOUSE
937.
08
FFE REFER TO ARCH TYP.TYP.EXISTI N G S A NI T A R Y SE
W E
R
LI N
EPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE 1
LOTUS
LAKE
O.
H.W.: 896.30
1 4 AC 10' FRONT YARD SETBACK 10' OH W
S E
T
B
A
C
K SS
EASEMENT
WILDFLOWER
GARDEN
HB
DN
DN
DN
RISR
DN3
RISR
DN3
RISR
DN3
4
AB
1
AB
G
1
G
1
2
L607
1
P
1
BP
1
BP
3
BP
2
BP
1
AB
2
AB
1
BP
3
BP
1
BP
1
AB
1
L607
2
P
40
SH
20SH TYP.
TYP.7
L607
TYP.LANDSCAPE
PLAN1 L401 LANDSCAPE
PLAN N 1" = 16'
SCALE: 1
inch =0
16'32'8'16 feet
PROPERTYLINE
OHW ORDINARY HIGH WATER
MARKCONTOUR
ELEVATIONXXXPOB POINT OF
BEGINNING PROPOSED CONTOURSXXX XX X
EXISTING
CONTOURS
POINT OF ENTRY
AT BUILDING TRAFFIC FLOW TRAFFIC
FLOW ARROW
EXISTING TREE TO
BE SAVED AND
PROTECTED DECID.CONIF.
ORNM.
PROPOSED NEWTREEDECID.
CONIF.ORNM.
SETBACK
EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION000.00X STAIRDN UP LEGEND creation date:6/
2/2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/
2. DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L401.dwglast saved:daniellejurichko June 3,
2021 11:01 AMThe designs shown and described herein including all technical
drawings,graphics and specifications thereof, are proprietary and
cannot be copied,duplicated or commercially exploited, in whole or
in part, without the express written permission of Travis Van
Liere Studio,
LLC. These are available for limited review and evaluation by clients, consultants, contractors,governement
agencies, and vendors only in accordance with this notice.Copyright 2021 Travis
Van Liere Studio, LLC. All rights reserved.license no:
I
hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under
my direct supervision and
that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.43728 T
R A V I S V A N L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0 9 H O R
S E S H O E C U R V E C H A N
H A
S
S
E
N ,
M I N
N
E S O
T A 5 5 3
1 7 B R U N
E
R R
E S I D E N C
E Drawn By:Date:Scale:Drawing:Sheet:12/
18/2020 DJ Rev #Description
Date VARIANCE APPLICATION 12/18/2020 VARIANCE
APPLICATION REVISIONS 6/4/2021 NOTE:
GENERAL NOTES 1.SEE SHEET L001
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.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 ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.8.AUTOCAD FILE
AVAILABLE TO CONTRACTOR UPON REQUEST FOR FIELD
LAYOUT.KEYNOTES 1.EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE(S) TYP. - 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
DOCK BY OWNER, REORIENT TO ALIGN
WITH PATH, STAIRS
5.FOOTPRINT OF EXISTING
LAKESIDE PAVING AND DECK N O T
F
O R
C
O N S T
R
U C
T I
O N 211 1ST STREET NORTH,
SUITE
350 MINNEAPOLIS, MN
55401 t
612 345 4275 NOTE: HYDROMULCH ON
3:
1 OR STEEPER SLOPES
PLANT
SCHEDULE TREES KEY
NAME QTY SIZE AB Abies balsamea BALSAM
FIR
9 EA.
14' (H)
B+B BP Betula
populifolia '
Whitespire'WHITESPIRE
BIRCH 12
EA.12' (H) B+
B PERENNIALS KEY NAME QTY SIZE
P1 PERENNIAL GARDEN PLANTING TO
BE
DETERMINED)
600
SF #1
CONT.P2 Equisetum hymale EQUISETUMHORSETAIL
940' 0"
935' 0"
930' 0"
925' 0"
934.50
TOW
3"940'
0"935'
0"930'
0"925'
0"
WALL
RETURN
BEYOND C.I.P. CONCRETE
WALL FACE OF
BUILDING DECK
ABOVE -SEE ARCH.
DWGS.
FINISHED
GRADE
BEYOND 960'
0"955'
0"950'
0"945'
0"
6 952.
00
BOW
609 FOUNDATION TO
FROST 955.
50
TOW SEE SURFACING
PLANS 4 METAL ADDRESS
NUMBERS.PIN TO
WALL C.I.P. CONCRETE
ENTRY ADDRESS
MONUMENT MAILBOX, BY
OWNER
1'3'-
6"1'
4'-6"
930'
0"
925' 0"
932.50
TOW FINISHED
GRADE BEYOND METAL-
CLAD TIMBER WALL
FACE OF
HOUSE
FULLY
BURY 2
COURSES
OF TIMBER
AGGREGATE
LEVELING
PAD BEYOND
WALL RETURN
BEYOND
9'935'
0"930.
00 BOW
940' 0"
930'
0"925'
0"932.
50
TOW 935'
0"930.
00
BOW 940'
0"WOOD
LATTICE SCREEN
932.
00
8'-11"
EQ.EQ.
9'FINISHED
GRADE BEYOND METAL-
CLAD
TIMBER WALL FACE
OF HOUSE BEYOND
WOOD LATTICE
SCREEN
FULLY
BURY 2
COURSES
OF
TIMBER
AGGREGATE
LEVELING PAD
BEYOND WALL
RETURN BEYOND
8'-11"EQ.EQ.2'-
6"2'-6"
934.00
C.I.P.
CONCRETE WALL
FACE OF
BUILDING
DECK ABOVE -
SEE
ARCH. DWGS.
929.33
934.
50
TOW WALL
RETURN FINISHED
GRADE BEYOND 934.00 BOW L501 WALL ELEVATIONS 1" = 16'
creation date:6/3/2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (
DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/2. DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L501.dwglast saved:
daniellejurichko June 3, 2021 10:45 AMThe designs shown and described herein
including all technical drawings,graphics and specifications thereof,
are proprietary and cannot be copied,duplicated or commercially exploited,
in whole or in part, without the express written permission
of Travis
Van Liere Studio, LLC. These are available for limited review and evaluation by clients,
consultants, contractors,governement agencies, and vendors only in accordance with this notice.
Copyright 2021 Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. All rights
reserved.
license no:I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by
me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of
Minnesota.43728 T R A V I S V A N L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0 9
H O R S E S H O E C U R V E C
H A
N
H
A
S
S E N ,
M
I N N
E S O T A
5 5 3 1 7 B
R U N E R R E S I D E N C E Drawn By:Date:Scale:
Drawing:Sheet:12/18/2020 DJ
Rev #Description Date
VARIANCE APPLICATION 12/18/
2020 VARIANCE APPLICATION REVISIONS 6/
4/2021 N OT F O R C O
N S T RU
C T I O N
211 1ST STREET NORTH, SUITE 350 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 t
612 345 4275 SCALE:1/
4" = 1'-0"WALL 1 -
NORTH FACING ELEVATION1 SCALE:1/4" =
1'-
L601
WALL, STAIR, ANDSURFACINGDETAILS
1" = 16'
1' , TYP.
7"TYP.5/
4x6 COMPOSITEDECKINGTYP.T.
O.S.
SEE PLAN VARIES - SEE PLANS VARIES -
SEE PLANS VARIES -
SEE
PLANS 1
2"
GAP.TYP.2x6 P.T.
JOIST @ 16" O.
C., TYP.
2" MIN.HELICAL
PIER TO FROST, TYP.
2x12 P.
T. STAIR STRINGER, TYP.5/
4x6 COMPOSITE DECKING BY ON
TREAD AND RISER,
TYP.2x6
P.
T.SLEEPER,
TYP.FINISHED GRADE BEYOND 1',
TYP.2' TYP.2'-6"
MAX.5/
4X6 COMPOSITE DECKING SKIRT
BOARD ALONG
ALL EXPOSED EDGES
PLAN1',
TYP.2x6 P.
T.
RIM JOIST, TYP.4" O.C.
TYP.4" O.C.
TYP.
SCALE:1 1/2" =
1'-0"
WOOD STAIRS
@ DECK3
5'-2"
8"
1'-4"8"3'3'-6"
929.33±VARIESBOW
VARIES SEE
PLANS 934.50
TOW
C.I.
P. CONCRETE WALL W/
BOARD FORM
FINISH SURFACING AS
SPECIFIED - SEE
PLANS COMPACTED GRANULAR BACKFILL -WRAP W/
GEO-FABRIC COMPACTED GRANULAR BACKFILL- WRAP
W/GEO-FABRIC 5
VERT @ 12"
O.C.5 HORZ
@ 12" O.
C.
4" DIA.
CORRUGATED PVC
DRAINTILE WITH SLEEVE.DRAIN TO DAYLIGHT. (VERIFY DAYLIGHT
LOCATIONS IN
FIELD)REINFORCED
CONCRETE SPREAD
FOOTING 4
@ 12" O.C.
EA WAY,
TOP
AND
BOTTOM
COMPACTED OR
UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE
GEOFABRIC, TYP.INFILL SOILS,
COMPACT PER ENGINEER
REQUIREMENTS AGGREGATE SURFACING
GEOFABRIC BENEATH,
TYP.2%
MIN.CATCH
BASIN. DRAIN
TO DAYLIGHT. (VERIFY
DAYLIGHT LOCATIONS
IN FIELD)
1'3" COVERAGE
2" COVERAGE
3"
COVERAGE COMPACTED
GRANULAR
BACKFILL - WRAP
W/
GEO-
FABRIC GEOFABRIC,
TYP.
INFILL SOILS,
COMPACT
PER ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS 929.
33
BOW 926.75
TOD PLAN 925.
00 TOS 1',
TYP.
3"4'2'-9"
O.C.
1 2" GAP.,
TYP.4" O.
C.TYP.923.
25 TOS VARIES - 2'-6" MAX.
7", TYP.3'-3" O.C.3'-8"COMPACTED
OR UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE
AS RECOMMENDED BY GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEER 2x12 P.T.
STAIR STRINGER, TYP.5/4x6
COMPOSITE DECKING ON TREAD
AND RISER, TYP.FINISHED
GRADE BEYOND
ADJACENT DECK - SEE PLANS 2x12
P.T. HANGERBOARD RIM JOIST
AND
SKIRT
BOARD
5/4X6 COMPOSITE
DECKING SKIRT
BOARD ALONG ALL EXPOSED EDGES
5/4X6 COMPOSITE DECKING
SKIRT BOARD
ALONG ALL EXPOSED
EDGES SLOPE STABILIZATION
SYSTEM 5/
4x6 COMPOSITE DECKING TYP.
2x6 P.
T. JOIST @
16"
O.C., TYP.HELICAL PIER TO
FROST, TYP.2x6P.
T.SLEEPER, TYP.2x6 P.
T. RIM JOIST, TYP.4" O.
C.TYP.SCALE:1 1/2" = 1'-0"WOOD STAIRCASE
SECTION, TYPICAL4 SCALE:3/4" = 1'-0"C.I.P.
CONC. WINDOW WELL1 creation date:6/3/2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/
PROJECTS (DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/2. DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L601.dwglast
saved:daniellejurichko June 3, 2021 10:39 AMThe
designs shown and described herein including all technical drawings,graphics
and specifications thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied,duplicated
or commercially
exploited, in whole or in part, without the express written permission of Travis Van
Liere Studio, LLC. These are available for limited review and evaluation by
clients, consultants, contractors,governement agencies, and vendors only in
accordance
with this notice.Copyright 2021 Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. All rights reserved.license
no:I hereby certify
that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I
am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.43728 T R A V I S V A N
L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0 9 H O
R S
E
S
H
O
E C U
R
V E C
H A N H A
S S E N , M I
N N E S O T A 5 5 3 1 7 B R U N E R
R E S I D E
N C E
Drawn By:Date:Scale:
Drawing:Sheet:
12/
18/
2020DJ
Rev #Description Date
VARIANCE APPLICATION 12/
18/2020 VARIANCE APPLICATION REVISIONS
6/4/2021 N
O T F
O R C O
N S
T
R U C
T
I O N 211
1ST STREET NORTH, SUITE 350 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401
t 612 345 4275 6'
MIN.3'-212"
6"6"MIN.31 2"6"
FINISHED GRADE AS
SPECIFIED - SEE
PLANS FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS
W/FABRICATOR PRIOR TO FABRICATION
AND CONSTRUCTION. PROVIDE SHOP
DRAWINGS FOR
METAL RAILING CONSTRUCTION 5"COMPACTED AGGREGATE LEVELING
COURSE P.T. 4X4,
TYP.
4 REBAR @ 48" O.
C. AND DEADMAN TIE-BACK
AND DEADMAN, TYP.KEEPER
CLIP,
TYP.
WRB- LAP OVER
METAL KEEPER CLIP
METAL
FASCIA, TYP.
PERMABARRIER
BENEATH FASCIA
CAP -
LAP OVER
WRB
CAP FLASHING TO MATCH FASCIA
FINISHED GRADE AS SPECIFIED -SEE PLANS MECHAREA
SCREEN W/ C.
I.P.
CONC. PIER FOOTINGS TO FROST 4"Ø
CORREGATED PVC DRAINTILE WITH
SLEEVE. DRAIN TO DAYLIGHT.VERIFY DAYLIGHT
LOCATIONS IN FIELD)3"COMPACTED
GRANULAR BACKFILL COMPACTED OR UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE 932.
50 TOW 2'-6"932.00 BOW 930.00
BOW SCALE:1/2" =
1'-
0"TIMBER WALL
W/ METAL CLADDING @ MECHANICAL
AREA2 TOP OF
PAVING ELEVATION VARIES ALL
JOINTS ARE
TO BE
SAW CUT UNLESS OTHERWISE
NOTED. JOINTS SHALL BE STRAIGHT,
CLEAN AND NEAT.STONE
VENEER, SEE
L102, L700 C.I.P. CONCRETE
SURFACING W/ #4 BAR @2'
O.
L602
DRAINAGE ANDLIGHTINGDETAILS
1" = 16'
SCALE:1 1/2" = 1'-0"
SQUARE CATCH BASIN INAGGREGATE8
TOP OF SURFACING
ELEVATIONVARIESSEE
MANUFACTURERRECOMMENDATIONUP LIGHT. SEE
MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS.
SURFACING AS SPECIFIED,
SEE PLANS
FLEXIBLE CONDUIT
SCALE:1 1/2" = 1'-0"
UPLIGHT IN LPLANTINGAREAS5
1" MAX
BOLLARD LIGHT, SEE L103
BOLLARD FLANGE MOUNT TO
CONCRETE PIER, SEE
MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS.
SURFACING BEYOND, SEE L401
FLEXIBLE CONDUIT TO LIGHT FIXTURE.
SCALE:1 1/2" = 1'-0"BOLLARD6
SLOPE SLOPE
WRAP W/ GEOFABRIC
DECK FRAMING
ABOVE
9" NDS GRATE, GALV.
STEEL GRATE
NDS 9" SQUARE
CATCH BASIN - USE
RISERS IF REQUIRED
NDS UNIVERSAL
OUTLET
DRAIN PIPE, CONNECT
TO SITE DRAINAGE
SYSTEM
INVERT ELEVATION
GRANULAR FILL, TYP.
GEOFABRIC, TYP.
1/2" WASHED DRESSER
TRAP ROCK BENEATH
DECK EXTENTS
925.75
RIM
SCALE:1 1/2" = 1'-0"
SQUARE CATCH BASIN BENEATHDECK9 SCALE:1 1/2" = 1'-0"
SQUARE CATCH BASIN IN PLANTINGAREAS10 SCALE:1 1/2" = 1'-0"
SLOT DRAIN @ GARAGETHRESHOLD11
SCALE:NTS
TYPICAL SLOPETAME2 ASSEMBLY ANDANCHORAGE1
SLOPETAME2
UNITS
PLAN
8.3 CM (3.3")
2.3 CM (0.9")
6 CM (2.4")
25 CM (9.8")16.7 CM (6.6")
50 CM (19.7")
2.5 CM
15 CM
TYPICAL ANCHOR PIN
FACE OF SLOPE
SLOPE CROSS SECTION
START AT TOP OF SLOPE
WITH HOLES IN UPPER RIGHT
CORNER.
TOP OF SLOPE
FOLD OVER TOP OF SLOPE AND ANCHOR
TYPICAL
ANCHOR
PIN
LOCATION
TOE
OF
SLOPETOP
OF
SLOPESLOPETAME 2 SLOPETAME2
FABRIC TOE
OF SLOPE ANCHOR
PIN SLOPETAME2 CROSS-
BRACING PLACE ROLLS
GOING DOWN THE
SLOPE W/
CROSS-BRACING
RUNNING ACROSS THE SLOPE FOR REFERENCE ONLY - SEE MANUFACTURER'
S FULL
SPECIFICATIONS
FOR
INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS SPECIFICATIONS UNITS:UNIT SIZE - 50 CM X 50 CM
X 2.5 CM 20"
X 20" X 1")AVAILABLE
IN
9 STANDARD ROLL SIZE UNIT WEIGHT -
558 GRAMS (19 OZ.)OR 2.2
KG (4.8 POUNDS)STRENGTH - 402
KG/CM (5720
PSI)COLOR - BLACK (STANDARD)
RESIN - 95% POST-
CONSUMER
RECYCLED HDPE/LDPE FABRIC:WEIGHT - 2.25 OZ./SY (
76.3 GM/M)TENSILE - 65 x 40 LB/
FT (585 KG/
M )Invisible Structures, Inc.1600
Jackson St., Suite
310 Golden, Colorado 80401 800-233-1510 OR
303-233-8383 FAX:303-233-
8282
rev.
08/04
18"
7 8"
CAULK JOINT
6"
6"5"VERIFY
DIMS.PER
MAFR.SPECS.6"
5" THICK CONCRETE
SURFACING W/SNOW-MET
SYSTEM BRICKSLOT 100
SST.SLOT DRAIN BY
ACO -OR APPROVED
EQ.C.
I.
P. CONCRETE
SURROUND W/ (
4)4 BARS
COMPACTED
CRUSHED AGG.
BASE,
COMPACT
TO 98% SPD
GEOFABRIC COMPACTED
OR UNDISTURBED
SUBGRADE GARAGE DOOR -
SEE ARCH. DWGS.GARAGE THRESHOLD -
V.I.
F.VERIFY DIMS. PER MAFR. SPECS.EXPANSION JOINT creation date:
6/2/2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (DROPBOX)/BRUNER
RESIDENCE/2. DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L602.dwglast saved:daniellejurichko June
2, 2021 4:34 PMThe designs shown and described herein including all
technical drawings,graphics and specifications thereof, are proprietary
and cannot be copied,duplicated or commercially exploited, in whole
or in part, without the express written permission of Travis
Van Liere
Studio, LLC. These are available for limited review and evaluation by clients, consultants, contractors,
governement agencies, and vendors only in accordance with this notice.Copyright 2021
Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. All rights reserved.license
no:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or
under my direct supervision
and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.43728
T R A V I S V A N L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0 9 H O
R S E S H O E C U R V E C H A
N H
A
S
S
E
N , M I
N
N E S
O T A 5 5
3 1 7 B R U
N E R R E S I D E N C E Drawn By:Date:Scale:Drawing:Sheet:
12/18/2020 DJ Rev #Description
Date VARIANCE APPLICATION
12/18/2020 VARIANCE
APPLICATION REVISIONS6/4/2021
N O T
F O
R
C O
N S T
R U C T
I O N 211
1ST STREET
NORTH, SUITE 350
MINNEAPOLIS,
MN 55401
t 612
345 4275 SLOPE TO
DRAINSLOPE TO DRAIN RIM ELEV.
VARIES SEE L201
VERIFY
AGGREGATE SURFACING BEYOND,
SEE PLANS
COVER TOP OF CATCH
BASIN WITH 2"
FREE
DRAINING AGGREGATE WRAP
GRATE WITH
GEOFABRIC
NDS GALVANIZED STEEL GRATE NDS RISER IF REQUIRED NDS 12"
OR 18" SQUARE CATCH
BASIN, AS SPECIFIED NDS UNIVERSAL
OUTLET INVERT ELEVATION DRAIN PIPE, CONNECT TO
OVERALL SITE DRAINAGE SYSTEM GRANULAR
FILL, TYP.GEOFABRIC, TYP.NOTE:
SAME
DETAIL APPLICABLE TO LAWN SURFACING. RAISE DRAIN TO
BE FLUSH WITH LAWN SURFACING.
1/
2" PREMOLDED EXPANSION JOINT 3 SMOOTH
BAR DOWELS 12" O.C.
CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE AS SPECIFIED - SEE SURFACING
PLAN FOR FINISH 1/4" X 3/
4" HAND
TOOLED CONTROL JOINT. SEE
LAYOUT PLAN
FOR JOINTING.CAST IN PLACE
CONCRETE AS SPECIFIED SEE
SURFACING PLAN
FOR FINISH.1/4" X
3/4" HAND TOOLED
CONTROL JOINT. SEE LAYOUT
PLAN ON SHEET L5 FOR JOINTING.
CONSTRUCTION JOINT AS SPECIFIED AND
NEEDED.CAST
IN PLACE
CONCRETE AS
SPECIFIED - SEE SURFACING
PLAN
FOR
FINISH.
1/
2"
PREMOLDED
EXPANSION
JOINT.
SILICONE JOINT W/
1 2"ØBACKERRODCASTINPLACE
CONCRETE ASSPECIFIED
SEE SURFACING
PLAN FOR FINISH.
EXPANSION JOINT CONTROL
JOINT CONSTRUCTION JOINT SILICON
EXPANSION JOINT1"
1 2"1
8"3/
4"1 8"
3/4"
1 2"VARIESVARIESVARIESVARIESSCALE:N/A CONCRETE JOINTING, TYPICAL4SCALE:
1 1/2" = 1'-0"AGGREGATE
SURFACING, TYPICAL3 AGGREGATE SURFACING
8"3"GEOFABRIC UNDERNEATH,
TYP.COMPACTED
OR UNDISTURBED
SUBGRADE AS
RECOMMENDED BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER
TOP OF
PAVING ELEVATION
VARIES TOP OF
PAVING ELEVATION
VARIES C.I.
P. CONCRETE SURFACING
W/
6 x 6 W.W. MESH.
EXPOSED FINISH.SEEPLANS
FOR JOINTING.EXPANSION
JOINTSAS
NEEDED.5"1' MIN.8"1"
COMPACTED, CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE,
COMPACT TO 98% SPD
COMPACTED OR
UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE,
AS RECOMMENDED BY GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEER.EXTEND BASE BEYOND
EXTENTS OF UNIT
PAVERS.SCALE:1 1/2" = 1'-
0"CONCRETE SURFACING
@ LAWN2V.
I.F.
21 2"O.C.FIXTURE TO
BE INSTALLED FLUSH WITH FINISHEDDECK.
SEE MFR'SSPECS.WOOD
DECKING,SEE
PLANS FLEXIBLE CONDUITTO
LIGHT FIXTURE. RUN
UNDER DECK JOISTS TOWARD
HOUSE.1 3/4"Ø OPENING
TO RECEIVE FIXTURE.
CENTER ON
DECKING PLANKV.I.
F.DECK JOIST158" TYP.
SCALE:1
1/2" = 1'-0"
SURFACE MOUNTED PATH LITE IN
DECKING7 SLOPE TO
DRAINSLOPE
TO DRAIN RIM
ELEV.ELEV.
VARIES, SEE
L2012" MIN.16"
L603
SITE ELEMENT DETAILS
1" = 16'
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
DECK - SURFACINGPLAN3
CB
CB CBCBCB
926.75
55'-8"
49'-9"
9 SP. EQ.
4'-9" O.C.
4'-9"
O.C.
13'-
11"17'-
812"
5'-8"11 2"ALGN 5"3'
4'-814"
4'-
814"
112"55'-9"14'18'6'FACE
OF HOUSE,
TYP. - V.
I.
F.925.67
RIM 4
L6035L603FACE OF
HOUSE,
TYP. - V.I.F.BBA
A 925.
50 RIM
JOIST HANGER,
TYP.
5' O.
C.5' O.C.1'-4"
O.C.TYP.6'-8" O.
C., TYP.DECK FRAME BEYOND, TYP.HELICAL PIER
FOOTING BEYOND, TYP.LATERAL LOAD CONNECTION DEVICE,
TYP. - AS REQUIRED PER MN RESIDENTIAL
CODE: (1)CONNECTOR REQUIRED
WITHIN
24" OF
ENDS OF DECK,
TOTAL OF (
4) CONNECTORS REQUIRED
PER DECK
CONNECTOR: SIMPSON
DTT1Z - OR
APPROVED
EQ.5/4x6 5/4x6
COMPOSITE DECKING, TYP.5/
4x6 COMPOSITE DECKING SKIRT BOARD ON
ALL EXPOSED EDGES ADJACENT DECK EXTENSION - SEE
PLANS 112"P.T. 2x8 LEDGER
BOARD CONNECTION @
HOUSE, TYP.
P.T. 2x6 RIM
JOIST, TYP.3) P.
T. 2x6 BEAM @
CENTER
P.T. 2x6 RIM JOIST, TYP.
HELICAL PIER FOOTING BEYOND, TYP.
CATCH BASIN BEYOND,
TYP. -CONNECT
TO SITE
DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND DRAIN TO DAYLIGHT
BLOCKING @
36"
O.C.,
TYP.
2) P.
T.
2x6 BEAM ADJACENT DECK FRAMING -
SEE PLANS 5'-8"BLOCKING
@ 36" O.C., TYP.
2'-2"1'-3"
925.50 RIM 925.50
RIM 925.50RIM
SCALE:
1/4" = 1'-
0"DECK - FOOTING AND FRAMING PLAN2
SCALE:3/4" =
1'-
0"DECK - SECTION
A-A4
SCALE:3/4" = 1'-
0"DECK -
SECTION B-B5 SLOPE
FACE OF HOUSE 5'
O.C.5' O.C.51 2" ,
TYP.1 4"
GAP, TYP.HOUSE FOUNDATION BEYOND-
V.I.F.
HOUSE FOUNDATION
BEYOND-
V.I.
F.
4'-9" O.C.1'-3"
4'-81 4"2'-2"
FACE
OF HOUSE P.
T. 2x8 LEDGER
BOARD CONNECTION @
HOUSE 926.75
TOD 926.
17
BOS
2)
P.
T.
2x6 BEAM, TYP.P.
T. 2x6 JOIST, TYP.3"3"
14'SIMPSON LUS26
OR APPROVED EQ.,
TYP.SIMPSON LUS26
OR APPROVED EQ.,
TYP.5'-
11"
3"3"
SLOPE 6
L602 6 L602 COMPACTED OR
UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE,AS SPEC'
D. BY GEOTECHNICAL ENG.
SIMPSON LUS26
OR APPROVED EQ., TYP.FINISHED
GRADE AS SPECIFIED - SEE PLANS COMMERCIAL LANDSCAPE
EDGING COMPOSITE DECKING BOARD, TYP.1x6 P.T.
RIM JOIST 5/
4x6 COMPOSITE DECKING SKIRT BOARD ON ALL
EXPOSED EDGES.DRILL & EPOXY 1/
2" DIA THREADED
ROD @ 24" O.C.
W/HILTI HIT-HY
70 ADHESIVE (4 1/2"EMBED) - INSTALL
THREADED RODS 4" FROM TOP
OF CMU
WALL P.T. 2x8 LEDGER
BOARD CONNECTION
@ HOUSE DRILL & EPOXY 1/
2" DIA THREADED ROD
@ 24"O.
C. W/
HILTI HIT-HY
70 ADHESIVE (4 1/2"
EMBED)INSTALL THREADED
RODS 4"
FROM TOP
OF CMU WALL 3) 2x6
BEAM @ CTR.3/4"
WASHED
DRESSER TRAP ROCK BENEATH DECK
EXTENTS HELICALPIER
FOOTING,TYP. - SIZE AND
DEPTH AS SPEC'D. BY GEOTECHNICAL
ENG.GEOFABRIC, TYP.CATCH BASIN - CONNECT TO
SITE DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND
DRAIN TO DAYLIGHT 2) P.T.
2x6 BEAM
4'-
81 4"
3"
41 2"
3"HELICAL
PIER FOOTING,
TYP. -
SIZE
AND
DEPTH AS SPEC'
D. BY
GEOTECHNICAL ENG.
COMPACTED OR
UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE,
AS SPEC'D.
BY GEOTECHNICAL
ENG.926.75
TOD
926.17
BOS FINISHED GRADE AS SPECIFIED -SEE
PLANS COMMERCIAL LANDSCAPE EDGING 3/
4" WASHED DRESSER TRAP ROCK
BENEATH DECK
EXTENTS CATCH
BASIN -CONNECT TO
SITE DRAINAGE
SYSTEM AND DRAIN
TO DAYLIGHT
GEOFABRIC, TYP.2) P.T. 1x6 RIM JOIST P.T.
2x6 JOIST, TYP.2) P.T. 2x6 BEAM COMPOSITE DECKING
BOARD, TYP.5/4x6 COMPOSITE DECKING SKIRT BOARD ON ALL EXPOSED EDGES.
creation date:6/3/2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (DROPBOX)/BRUNER
RESIDENCE/2. DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L603.
dwglast saved:daniellejurichko June 3, 2021 11:04 AMThe designs
shown and described herein including all technical drawings,graphics and
specifications thereof,
are proprietary and cannot be copied,duplicated or commercially exploited, in whole or in
part, without the express written permission of Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC.
These are available for limited review and evaluation by
clients,
consultants, contractors,governement agencies, and vendors only in accordance with this notice.Copyright 2021
Travis Van Liere Studio,
LLC. All rights reserved.license no:I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.43728
T R A V I S V A N L I E R E date:
1/23/
2018
6
6
0
9 H O
R
S E S
H O E C U
R V E C H A
N H A S S E N , M I N N E S O T A 5 5
3 1 7 B R U
N E R
R E S I
D E N
C E Drawn By:
Date:Scale:
Drawing:Sheet:
12/18/
2020 DJ
Rev #
Description
Date VARIANCE APPLICATION 12/
18/2020
VARIANCE APPLICATION REVISIONS
6/4/2021
N O T
F O R
C
O N S
T R
U C T
I
O N 211
1ST STREET
NORTH, SUITE
350 MINNEAPOLIS,
MN 55401 t
612 345 4275
3"4"1'-4" MIN.
3" OF
WASHED 3/
8"-MINUS
DRESSER TRAP AGGREGATE
GEO FABRIC UNDERNEATH, TYP.
COMPACTED OR
UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE 12"
Ø CONC. FOOTING TO
FROST 1x4 CEDAR CAP
1x3 CEDAR
TRIM,FRONT AND
BACK 1x2
CEDAR VERT.INSIDE
1x2 CEDAR
HORIZ.,TYP. -
OUTSIDE 3X3
CEDAR
POSTBEYOND
EMBED CEDAR POST IN
FOOTING 1x4CEDAR BOTTOM RAIL 1x3 CEDAR
TRIM,FRONTAND
BACK 11 2"11 2" GAP34"
112" GAPTYP.3'-
612"31 2"FINISHED
GRADE SEE PLANS
1x4 CEDAR
CAP 1x3 CEDAR TRIM, FRONT
AND BACK 4x4
CEDAR POST
1x4 CEDAR BOTTOM
RAIL 1x3
CEDAR TRIM,
FRONT
AND BACK 1x2
CEDAR VERT.,TYP. -
INSIDE 1x2 CEDAR
HORIZ.,
TYP. - OUTSIDE
112"
112"
L607
PLANTING DETAILS
NTS
2 x DIA. OF BALL MIN.
REFER TO PLANTING
PLANS FOR QUANTITY
AND SIZE
WRAP AND PROTECT TREES
THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION,
REMOVE TREE WRAPPING
AFTER 1-YEAR WARRANTY
WALK THROUGH
ROOT BALL. REMOVE ALL
WIRE. SCORE ROOT BALL AND
PULL BACK TOP 1
3 OF BURLAP
AND TWINE
SHREDDED HARDWOOD
MULCH. @ 3" DEPTH.
APPROVED
PLANTING SOIL
MIX AS SPECIFIED
4" TOPSOIL MIN,
FINE GRADE AND
SOD
PREPARED OR
UNDISTURBED
SUBGRADE
NOTES:
1.ALL BARE ROOT PLANTINGS TO FOLLOW NURSERY
BEST PRACTICE STANDARDS
2.SOAK ROOTS IN WATER FOR LEAST ONE HOUR BUT
NOT MORE THAN 24 HOURS PRIOR TO PLANTING.
3.SCARIFY ROOTS AND THE BOTTOM OF THE HOLE.
4.APPLY CORRECTIVE PRUNING OF BRANCHES AND
ROOTS IF NECESSARY.
5.TRANSFER PLANT DIRECTLY FROM WATER TO HOLE.
SET PLANT SO ROOT FLARE IS AT THE FINISHED
SOIL ELEVATION.
6.WATER THOUROUGHLY WITHIN 2 HOURS TO SETTLE
PLANTS AND FILL VOIDS
7.BACKFILL VOIDS AND WATER A SECOND TIME
8.PLACE MULCH WITHIN 4 HOURS OF THE SECOND
WATERING UNLESS SOIL MOISTURE IS EXCESSIVE.
9.REFER TO IRRIGATION PLANS FOR IRRIGATION
INFORMATION.
6" MIN.
2 x DIA. OF BALL MIN.
SHREDDED
HARDWOOD MULCH
@ 3" DEPTH.
APPROVED
PLANTING SOIL
MIX AS SPECIFIED
4" TOPSOIL MIN,
FINE GRADE AND
SOD
PREPARED OR
UNDISTURBED
SUBGRADE
REFER TO IRRIGATION
PLANS FOR IRRIGATION
INFORMATION.
REFER TO PLANTING PLANS
FOR QUANTITY AND SIZE
PROTECT TREES DURING
TRANSPORTATION AND
THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION
REMOVE PROTECTION AFTER
TREE HAS BEEN PLANTED
ROOT BALL. REMOVE ALL
WIRE. SCORE ROOT BALL AND
PULL BACK TOP 1
3 OF BURLAP
AND TWINE
4" TOPSOIL MIN, FINE
GRADE AND SOD
PREPARED OR
UNDISTURBED
SUBGRADE
SUBGRADE -
SCARIFY WALLS
OF TREE PIT TO
ENSURE GOOD
WATERING
PERCOLATION
REFER TO IRRIGATION
PLANS FOR IRRIGATION
INFORMATION.
3" SHREDDED HARDWOOD
MULCH COVER, PLANTING,
TURF OR APPROVED EQUAL.
VERIFY W/ LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT FINAL MULCHING
REQUIREMENTS
4" HIGH WATERING RING,
DIAMETER TO MATCH ROOT
BALL AREA - FOR CONSTR.
PHASE ONLY, REMOVE
MULCH RINGS PRIOR TO
FINAL WALK THRU
REFER TO PLANTING PLANS
FOR QUANTITY AND SIZE
PROTECT TREES DURING
TRANSPORTATION AND
THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION
REMOVE PROTECTION AFTER
TREE HAS BEEN PLANTED
REFER TO PLANTING PLANS
FOR ADDITIONAL TREE
INFORMATION
WRAP AND PROTECT TREES
THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION,
REMOVE TREE WRAPPING AFTER
1-YEAR WARRANTY WALK THROUGH
4" TOPSOIL MIN, FINE
GRADE AND SOD
PREPARED OR
UNDISTURBED
SUBGRADE
3" SHREDDED HARDWOOD
MULCH COVER, PLANTING, TURF
OR APPROVED EQUAL. VERIFY
W/ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FINAL
MULCHING REQUIREMENTS
4" HIGH WATERING RING.
DIAMETER TO MATCH ROOT
BALL AREA - FOR CONSTR.
PHASE ONLY, REMOVE
MULCH RINGS PRIOR TO
FINAL WALK THRU
SUBGRADE -
SCARIFY WALLS
OF TREE PIT TO
ENSURE GOOD
WATERING
PERCOLATION
REFER TO IRRIGATION
PLANS FOR IRRIGATION
INFORMATION.
2 x DIA. OF BALL MIN.
REFER TO IRRIGATION
PLANS FOR IRRIGATION
INFORMATION.
REFER TO PLANTING
PLANS FOR QUANTITY
AND SIZE
WRAP AND PROTECT TREES
THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION,
REMOVE TREE WRAPPING
AFTER 1-YEAR WARRANTY
WALK THROUGH
ROOT BALL. REMOVE ALL
WIRE. SCORE ROOT BALL AND
PULL BACK TOP 1
3 OF BURLAP
AND TWINE
SHREDDED HARDWOOD
MULCH. @ 3" DEPTH.
APPROVED
PLANTING SOIL
MIX AS SPECIFIED
4" TOPSOIL MIN,
FINE GRADE AND
SOD
PREPARED OR
UNDISTURBED
SUBGRADE
VARIES
REFER TO IRRIGATION PLANS
FOR IRRIGATION INFORMATION.
UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE
PLANTING SOIL MIX
PROPOSED PLANTING BED,
REFER TO PLANTING AREAS.
DRESS BED WITH 3" OF FINELY
SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH
12" MIN.ASSHOWN, SEE L401SECONDARY
EDGE
OFPLANTING BEDDD D NOTES:1.D = TYPICAL
ON CENTER (O.C.)SPACING
AS INDICATED
IN THE PLANTING SCHEDULE 2.REFER
TO IRRIGATION
PLANS
FOR
IRRIGATION
INFORMATION.PLANT CENTER,TYP.PLANT
MATERIAL, SEE SHEET
L401 MULCH, AS
SPECIFIED
PREPARED OR UNDISTURBED
SUBGRADE PLANTING SOIL MIX 1/2
D 1/2 DPRIMARY
EDGE OF PLANTING
BEDD PLANT
MATERIAL, SEE SHEET
L401 MULCH, AS
SPECIFIED PLANTING
SOIL
MIX
PREPARED OR UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE PLANT
INTO BIOD-
MAT 40 EROSION
CONTROL 2 X
DIAMETER
OF ROOT BALL 6"
MIN.REFER TO
IRRIGATION
PLANS FOR
IRRIGATION INFORMATION.
UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE PREPARED
PLANTING SOIL,
AS SPECIFIED SHREDDED
HARDWOOD MULCH, 3" DEPTH
ROOT BALL. REMOVE ALL
WIRE, SCORE, AND PULL BACK TOP
1/3
OF BURLAP AND TWINE
SCALE:1" = 1'-0"DECIDUOUS BALLAND BURLAP TREE PLANTING, TYPICAL1
SCALE:1" = 1'-0"CONIFEROUS BALLAND BURLAP TREE PLANTING, TYPICAL2
SCALE:1" = 1'-0"DECIDUOUS SPAYED TREE PLANTING, TYPICAL3
SCALE:1" = 1'-0"CONIFEROUS
SPAYED TREE PLANTING, TYPICAL4
SCALE:1" = 1'-0"SHRUB PLANTING, TYPICAL6
SCALE:1" = 1'-0"GARDEN PLANTINGS, TYPICAL7
SCALE:1" = 1'-
0"GROUNDCOVER PLANTINGS, TYPICAL8
SCALE:1" = 1'-0"DECIDUOUS BARE-ROOT PLANTING, TYPICAL5
SCALE:1" = 1'-
0"PLANTINGS ON SLOPE9 creation date:6/2/2021filepath:/Users/
daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/2. DWG/1.
DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L607.dwglast saved:daniellejurichko June 2, 2021 4:43
PMThe designs shown and described herein including all technical drawings,graphics and
specifications thereof, are proprietary and cannot be copied,
duplicated or commercially exploited, in whole or in part, without
the express written permission of Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC.
These are
available for limited review and evaluation by clients, consultants, contractors,governement agencies, and vendors
only in accordance with this notice.Copyright 2021 Travis Van Liere Studio,
LLC. All rights reserved.license no:I hereby certify
that
this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am
a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota.43728 T R A V
I S V A N L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0 9 H O R S E S
H O E C U R V E C H A N H A S
S E
N ,
M
I
N
N E S
O
T A 5
5 3 1 7 B
R U N E R R
E S I D E N C E Drawn By:Date:Scale:Drawing:Sheet:12/18/2020 DJ
Rev #Description Date VARIANCE APPLICATION 12/
18/2020 VARIANCE
APPLICATION REVISIONS 6/4/
ROOT ZONE
ROOT PRUNING
LIMITS
PRUNING CUT, TYP.,
PER ARBORIST
RECOMMENDATIONS
BASE OF TREE
GROUND PLANE
PLAN VIEW
MAXIMUM 25" ON ONE SIDE OR 33% OF
TOTAL ROOT SYSTEM
NO MORE THAN HALF
THE CROWN OF THE TREE
AT END OF SLOPE SECURE BLANKET
MATERIAL BY INSERTINGSTAPLES ABOUT
20" APART THROUGH THE FABRIC
EXTEND MATERIAL ABOUT
40" ON TOP OF THE
GROUND AND RANDOMLY
INSERT STAPLES THROUGH
THE MATERIAL ABOUT 20"
APART
NOTES:
1.EROSION CONTROL BLANKET TO BE CATEGORY 4-COCONUT 2S 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 5:1 PER MNDOT SPEC. SECTION 3885.
2.INSTALL PER MNDOT SPEC. SECTION 2575
LONGITUDINAL SEAMS:
BLANKET MATERIAL MUST OVERLAP AT
LEAST 6" AND STAPLES INSERTED
THROUGH BOTH FABRICS AT A
MAXIMUM SPACING OF 40" APART
TRANSVERSE SEAMS:
BLANKET MATERIAL MUST
OVERLAP AT LEAST 6" AND
STAPLES INSERTED THROUGH
BOTH FABRICS AT A MAXIMUM
SPACING OF 20" APART
STAPLES AT 3' O.C.
STAPLES MUST BE
INSERTED THROUGH
OVERLAP MATERIAL
SLOPE LENGTH LESS THAN 50 1.BEFORE INSTALLATION APPLY TOPSOIL,
FERTILIZER AND SEED TO SURFACE.2.BEGIN AT THE TOP OF THE CHANNEL, INSTALL MATS BY ANCHORING IN A 6" 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 12" 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 IN A 6"
DEEP BY 6" WIDE TRENCH.6.THE TERMINAL END OF MATS MUST BE ANCHORED WITH A ROW OF STAPLES APPROXIMATELY
12" APART IN A 6"
DEEP BY 6" WIDE TRENCH.7.
BACKFILL AND SEED AFTER STAPLING.8.FOLLOW MANUFACTURER'
S RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR PROPER
INSTALLATION.FABRIC
ANCHORAGE TRENCH
BACKFILL WITH TAMPED
NATURAL SOIL WIRE MESH REINFORCEMENT,
ATTACH FABRIC TO WIRE MESH WITH
HOG RINGS, PER
MNDOT SPEC.
SECTION
3886 B1.
SILT FENCE
FABRIC DIRECTION OF
RUNOFF FLOW METAL (
OR WOOD)
POST OR STAKE NATURAL SOIL
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 1/4
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 THE
SILT FENCE,
ENSURE THAT THE
MAXIMUM SLOPE LENGTH
BEHIND THE
FENCE DOES
NOT EXCEED
THE SPECIFICATIONS SHOWN IN TABLE
NOTE: SILT FENCE SHALL
FOLLOW
MNDOT
SPEC. SECTION 3886.DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FIGURE 1:
TYPICAL
INSTALLATION
FOR SILT
FENCE
6"MIN 6"MINPLAN VIEW NOTES: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.
6' MAX 6' MAX.
POST SPACING
3'
MINIMUM
6' IDEAL FROM DRIPLINE
DRIPLINE 2/3 OFLOGDRIPLINE INSTALL SHREDDED
HARDWOOD MULCH MNDOT TYPE 6). EQUIVALENT
MATERIAL MAY
BE SUBSTITUTED AT THE DISCRETION
OF THE ENGINEER.STAKE DRIVEN THROUGH
LOG
MESH COIR LOG 6"-7"
MINIMUM DIAMETER SOIL
WEDGE OR 2"X2" STAKE PRE-DRILLED
HOLES 0.5"
X0.5" OPENING IN
NET 1/3 OFLOG10'
MIN
LENGTH2" WASHED
COURSE AGGREGATE,12"
THICK, OVER GEOFABRIC 50'M I N 20' MI N EDG E O F P U B LI C R O A D
O R P A V E M E N T TABLE 1: MAXIMUM
SLOPE LENGTH AND SLOPE
FOR WHICH SILT
FENCE
IS APPLICABLE BY CALCULATION BY CALCULATION BY
ACCEPTED DESIGN PRACTICES SLOPE (H:V)%SILT
FENCE STORAGE EQUALS 2 FT FOR
A 100-YEAR EVENT SILT FENCE STORAGE EQUALS 2 FT
FOR A 2-
YEAR EVENT
OR
3 FT FOR A 100-YEAR EVENT MAXIMUM SLOPE
LENGTH 100:1 1%400 FT 900 FT 100
FT 50:1 2%200 FT 450 FT 75
FT 25:1 4%100 FT 225 FT 75
FT 20:1 5%80 FT 180 FT 75-
50 17:1 6%67 FT 150 FT 50 FT
12.5:1 8%50 FT 112 FT 50 FT
10:1 10%40 FT 90 FT 50-25 FT
5:1 20%20 FT 45 FT 25-15
FT 4:1 25%16 FT 36 FT 15
FT 3:1 33%12 FT 27 FT 15
FT
2:1 50%
8 FT
18 FT 15 FT L609 EROSION CONTROL DETAILS 1" = 16'
creation date:6/2/2021filepath:/Users/daniellejurichko/Dropbox (TVLS)/PROJECTS (
DROPBOX)/BRUNER RESIDENCE/2. DWG/1. DRAWINGS/VARIANCE II/L609.dwglast saved:
daniellejurichko June 2, 2021 4:43 PMThe designs shown and described herein
including all technical drawings,graphics and specifications thereof,
are proprietary and cannot be copied,duplicated or commercially exploited,
in whole or in part, without the express written permission
of Travis
Van Liere Studio, LLC. These are available for limited review and evaluation by clients,
consultants, contractors,governement agencies, and vendors only in accordance with this notice.
Copyright 2021 Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC. All rights
reserved.
license no:I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by
me or under my
direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of
Minnesota.43728 T R A V I S V A N L I E R E date:1/23/2018 6 6 0 9
H O R S E S H O E C U R V E C
H A
N
H
A
S
S E N ,
M
I N N
E S O T A
5 5 3 1 7 B
R U N E R R E S I D E N C E Drawn By:Date:Scale:
Drawing:Sheet:12/18/2020 DJ
Rev #Description Date
VARIANCE APPLICATION 12/18/
2020 VARIANCE APPLICATION
REVISIONS 6/4/2021 N O T
FO
R C O
N ST R U C
T I ON
211 1ST STREET
NORTH, SUITE 350MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 t
612 345 4275SCALE:
N/A TREE
PROTECTION FENCINGINSTALLATION5
Memorandum
To: MacKenzie Young-Walters, Associate Planner
From: Matt Unmacht, Water Resources Coordinator
CC: Charles Howley, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Ryan Pinkalla, Water Resources Technician
Erik Henricksen, Project Engineer
Date: June 24, 2021
Re: 6609 Horseshoe Curve Variance - City Planning Case No. 2021-07
The Water Resources Department has reviewed the variance request located at 6609
Horseshoe Curve. These comments are divided into two categories: general comments and
proposed conditions. General comments are informational points to guide the applicant in the
proper planning of any water resources issues or stormwater infrastructure for this project, to
inform the applicant of possible extraordinary issues and/or to provide the basis for findings.
Proposed conditions are requirements that Water Resources recommends be formally imposed
on the applicant in the final order.
General Comments/Findings
1. The applicant is requesting variances to construct a deck and retaining wall within the
bluff setback and bluff impact zone at 6609 Horseshoe Curve . This is a second variance
request for this property, a previous variance was approved in January 2021. The
variance request associated with this memorandum is independent from the previous
approval.
2. The property is located on Lotus Lake. According to the Riley-Purgatory Bluff Creek
Watershed District, water quality on Lotus Lake has improved in some parameters, such
as water clarity and phosphorus, but degraded in others, such as chlorophyll-a, in recent
years. The project is proposing construction very close to the lake and on the steep
slopes on the project.
3. The applicant is proposing to extend the deck by 2-feet towards the lake. This is not
anticipated to have an impact on the Living Wall or retaining walls on the property.
4. The applicant proposing the installation of a “Living Wall” and fescue that is called “Low
Grow No Mow” at two different locations. This is intended to reduce erosion potential
on the retaining wall area and on steep slopes on the property.
5. As for other water resources issues: outside of Lotus Lake, there are no wetlands on this
property. In addition, this project does not involves any City owned stormwater
infrastructure. As such, there are no concerns or conditions to place on the project
based on these conditions.
6. It is the opinion of the Water Resources Department that this variance request can be
granted in accordance with the requirements of the Chanhassen Code of Ordinances (as
it pertains to Water Resources requirements) and City Standards.
Proposed Conditions
1. There are no proposed conditions associated with Water Resources review of this
variance request. Given the sensitive nature of Lotus Lake, the proximity of the
proposed work to the lake, and the steep slopes on site, extra care and review will be
undertaken during the building permit process to ensure that proper erosion and
sediment control measures are undertaken during construction to protect the lake.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
ss.
cor.NTY oF CARVER )
I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on
June 24,2021, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk ofthe City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of a Public
Hearing to consider a request for Variances to construct a deck' retaining wall and air
conditioning pad within the blufr setback and blufr impact zone on proPerty located at
6609 Horseshoe Curve, zoned Singte-Family Residential (RSF), Ptanning Case No. 2021'074
to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy ofsaid notice in an envelope
addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the
United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such
owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County,
Minnesota and by other appropriate records.
Kim T.Deputy Cler
Subscribed and swom to before me
thiilFt\ayo
JEAI{ItI SIECKLING
itcferyfubiltrnooooft6frrIS-,fi !1. re.
tr-
v
2021.
Notary Public
Seal)
Subject
Parcel
Otlchltn r
This map B nerther a legally aecoaded map nor a suNey and is not intended to be us€d
a! ohe. This map is a compilalion of records, infomabon and data located in vatious ctty,
coonty, state and Ieder-al offices and olhe( source8 regading the aaea showlt. and is to
be used for refurence purpoa$ only. The City does not wanant that the Geogtrphic
ln ofinatio. System (GlS) Data us€d to p.epae this map are enor tee. and the Crty does
nol ep.esent that the GIS Data can be used for navoa{rcm|, traclino or any olher
puQo6e requiflng exacting measuEme of dBl,ance or diredion or paecision in the
de clion of geograoic featrr*. The precedino disdaitner is provided pu6uant to
Minnesota St.altes 5,(66.03, SuM. 2l (2000). and the user ot thie map actnord€dg€s
that $e City ghall not be liable io. any damag*, and expaessly waives all claims, and
agrees to debnd. indemnify. and hold hamles the City fro.n any and all daims baouOht
by User, rts employees or agents. or third parl,es which aise out of the usefs access or
u3€ of data pn vraled.
Dirclahrsr
This map as neilher a legally lecoftled map nor a survey anal is rlot inlended to be used
as one. This map is a comfilation ot recods. infomalioo and data located an varcus city,
counly. state and lEderal offce3 and otlEr sources regadino the area shown. and i8 to
be used br reGlence purposes only. The City does not warant that the Geog6phic
lnfomation SysEm (GlS) Oata used to prepale this map are enor free. and ihe City does
no[ represent f|at lhe GIS Data can be used fo. navigatbMl. baclin€ o. any ofier
purpos€ requidng 6xac'tno measuement of distance or dileclim or paecision in the
depidirrr ot OeogEphac baturEs. The precedino disdaimer as Prova(l€d pursuant to
Minn8ota statl,te3 5448.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of lhis map elnowl€dges
fiei a|e City shall not be liable tor any damag€., and epre$ly waiv* all daim3, and
agre€ to deGnd, indemnify, and hold harmless the City iorn any and all daims b.ouoht
by u3er. ltr employees oa agents. or lhid part$ $'trich erise out of the us€/s acaess or
use ol ahta prcvided
Next RecordxTAX_NAMET
rTAX_AD D_Ll r
ITAX_ADD_L2r
Subject
Parcel
L ,lt
r
t
I
r\
r(
TAX_NAMET
TAX_ADD_L1l
TAX ADD L2l
A
t
I
J
Eg
EdcD!
EF
92 ,
EO.
ioog
F-
o6gr9
8EN_€(
od
E
E-cE=
Eb
F-g
p2d)
o
o
t-
F.
n)
o
EoEo
ocfoo
o
E >
O" co9ho=tr
o.! o:E6,
E>E
3Ep!
cr, oE=NPEc(E= X
E;
o.E O-:oE
9EE8E:-o d'
oE:o;EobqrlE
EEEE
sEge
IDcl
dl
c)
9.
ul
oc
f
c)
c
g
dl
i
oc!
E
o
oeo
dro
Eo;
otoo,
l,aloq
o!?:
or !io;
o<
o)t2e fr
i,eE sc E
EEee I re E
aEsg EEE€
EEEEEEEEEfi;i EEES
1EE+JEEEEoE.9q +-
c a- o ^! jcF(oCLTl,,TN(9t
at o;
El HH;,..
r Fl >t (l,OiiIEEEEE
eflE*aiEr
iE,igEEiE
eHr.attE
fi$ eE.flgf!
g;it €
E
gE
o
6
o
c
lo
t-o
No6t
o
ooot!
l!
J
J
B
PT*
o)
UPEO,
or -o.o)
g0)
OE-
oh9oco,o>
FO
o(JEoo'or,
oao.
oooao- lt
96>o)
o-co=
Po)
a4to(!>.
O)
E
u;
oE
t,
cDo
aDoc,
EO
EoEg
5E
EgLoEi
o0,
EsaQor
EEB
oooo-
i:oIc)co9.}
E6EcacorXq9E:
ID- Eox-:
Ebb
zEfr
rcc
5EEau;-1
o;
izE>
q,
EF
c6
0,
oo
o
GooJ
oo.
Lo
G
oo
o
CI
ii
a,
E!
o
Eooo
o-
gEOoEo- l!
E!
9i;
o.=
of=
G.t
E
c6..
o9CEoo,
tD=!,
Efogo
o
Eoo
E"O.=
oi.9oFrE
9oEo
tto- .E
oE!
ro.
cEotrz3
ot!
Ect!
o
CDE
oo
g.E
r!oo'=-
E(,E
o€ods
OE
ol
iEi5
o6oEEt!
o
o
6
o,
o
ooF.
l'-
i
o)o
Eo
o
cfoo
oI
f >
O" c
Eefl
o.E 0):
EE,
E=E8Ero -.!cto
E.= N
YoO)
PE!6:ii:(!
EqEtsu3(!!(/)
d:-ot-oE]:olEo
ss:EE:383Ege
oc
f
d)
q,
9
LU
ocl
d)
E
q
dl
o
c
l!
E
o
oP
o!
d)o
o:(
ro9r
EA
9E
O'ToE
o<
o)
EefrO -n =:
gE:$,,i>0r96 o..ql6trEE- Eo A
tsg; gsr
E
s:3EE
e"aeE
EEAH !}5E
i! EE#E
a;:l+ E;: I
E aE; aEE Fn
Iea;-EEEHEEO- o{=.YFOC(J(,,-Nc)t
tDt O) ;
El H Hr,
eEl=:st:
E*]e;aiEE
fi*lSEE=ifi
EfNfEEEE
f;g eEnsr!
E 3;E E ET:3; b >EF5 E
1..o
6lo(\l
o
tr
E
ooot!
C
t!
q
q
i;;
PTqo)
UPEo-
or -o-co
E6oc-oa
9ococr>FO
oo!o(,
EA
ooo,
orooaA!,
3-.}.95
3e
o:
qPo))
ooo>6)
E-
o
E
o
E
t4.
iao
6
EdoE.=
rD
aa6
9t
FO
EP
ciooP
F-o6g
8e
6r- g(
od
E
cE:
9E
c6 ..
o9trcoo
o=OE
ooo
tr
o,
CD(
D
cr, oce'EO
EoEg
EE:9
Lin6>
E6€-
P-'
ErCL9ol
iHE9io
Loos36EfE(!
o.>
o\uocl,/)co69
9E;
9lo E
Ehb
esH
f EE
6E*
Ut u; .=
rirza;
E
3
E
t
o
l()
oJ
l!
ooa
PG
G
IJ
ea
iotr
o
oclo
o-
t.o
o.(t9to-J
9a
0, .=
o.x
rO(!.C
E
oF
i:
c6
oo
o ooo o.\ O (n Oo O OOO O OOO O OO O O OQ O QOQ O O Fi O;F6--c.r-..1 =rnrna r<-rnNFr r\ C) N (\ Fr Fr .{ (o <t rnN(nr{O..{ori\i ct F cj o o o o o o o .n o o (n o ln (n ln o o o o o c{ .! N N o .{ .\r r! r'{
ii 6 i\ 5 6 6o 6 66 6 o6O o O oo o (f () () o oo o o Qo O OOO66 ; 6 6 or = 6 - - sr O rn !n O .o O O o ...r o o .rl or o o o o () o o oo66o(o(oOooco@ornl{t4.'1Oooo!nst<traul .Yl .n r!' r!)Q l!1.o om
6 ii o F. n .') .n (n .n .n o @ o o @ @ ro I \9 \ (o (o N F\ (O (I, (O (O @ (O (O (O (Oz ,i 6 6 rn rn u) L^ !a Ln rj't !^ !n rri Ln lrt rrl L,t ln r, rn u) La Ln L/) u) rrl ul r./1 Ltr Ln rn Ln Ln
ENNNa!Na!a!6la!a!a\l(\l^l 6l a\l 6l N a! a\ a! r! a\l a\l r\l a{ c{ a{ N N a'{ a{ r! 6l
ka = n V ax. E G G.G,E G. e,4, E e, G, G, c Gt c. G.E 6. G. G, E. G. tr<===f I l:)f ltf f,lllll:)f f 3lf,lf,f =)
OA',5Q U IJ (J (J U (J () (J U (J U (J (J U U U (J (J (J U U (J U U
ur ! !9 !! !9 ru r! !! uJ u,r !u lrJ uJ M.l t! ut BJ u ul uJ uJ r! r! r! t! t! t! uJuJo :. > > > o J o J J oooo o ooo o oo o o oo o ooo o oo o
r-L L!----d EI- !---- ------- :E-- --I- --ttr = i t, tt - tt * * q q vt vt tt\ tl tl ti vl vl ta ta rh th ttt tt tn v) th ta t^ t\ thH; e e i H ga H !1 -,+ H H AUAA H H H B AAAA H H H H H 3 B HHd < v) v) q d. ry d. ry ry E d c c. G. e. e, e, G, G, E s d. E E 6. G. e, 4 4. d. E d.
o o'1 S S S O I o a f o o oo o o ooo o oo o o oo o oo o ooooid= = =- a -.o.o ---- ---- --- - --- ---- -t- -{
r-,n d d G m..r r-{ (\ (n rt F\ Ctt ri m st !a O lJ1 Cr !r O O gt !n N -l Ln (o -r lJ,| (q F.uJ ba Fa Lr.r ur t. i:j o o o ci o O 6..l Fl Fr Fr..,l N m rn t lo \1,,'\ F. @ € F{ qr qr O) OrE6inryi6oi@roib66 (o G @ ro (o (o (o \o (9 (9 lo (o .o lo (o (o (o (o (o (o (o roroa66iyi - ij @ (o (o (o (o (o @ (o (o (o (o (o (o 10 ro \o ro (o (o (o \o (D @ Lo (o (o (o (o
DgrYt <r <r (ooo (o(o(o rororo@\o (o (o (o @.:l (o (o:
1r/i-.nN6oNo'lr\TNNNNNNNNa\loN.'{(] ii i;i; 666 1,! rn rn r/) r,) r, r, r,) !n La rri Ln ur u) u)t| +O +9? ?qq ??+q? q99 q+q , q
1 + r\F.F.+F.F.F- F F N r\ F. r\ r- F F- F- N F. t\ F- F F.FF\F\F\F.Fr-F: +:{;{
i:: -r -r ;-.1 .-{ r.l Fl ti ..,1 r-.{ ..1 ra F{ Fl Fl Fl .l .'{ !"{ r'{ F{ Fl Fl Fl .'l t"l t"l r'{:
l n .^..r.n i.i m (n rn m an .n lnman ln (n (n (Yl (n.n (Yl .n d) tn (n (n (n rYl rn d1 rn (o.'
6 in iri ;x rri .ri l.n l.n rrt r.ar rJt r^ !n !n l./) rJl rJl ln rJ) rn !n !/r Ln rn ul !/l ra u1 r/1 L/l r/l
Z '/i
rri ri ui Ed .a rn !n ui r.,,t !a u1 La !r1 s1 r/) !n r.,t !^ !,t Ln ul ra u1 rJl !a r/) Ln rn rn Lrl rJt
z z z z n! z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z 2 z z z z z z. z 2 z z z
O'r,t i 2 2'u 2 Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
I -'l F = @ u u J uJ uJ uJ uJ t! UJ gJ lJ., t! UJ (}, lfJ UJ UJ lJ.l El r! uJ t! U.J UJ UJ uJ uJ t! UJ t!
ro = i; t^ 6 r 6 th tt tt ttt tt t\ th vt qt .^ tn vl U\ ta a v1 lt tl\ v\ tA th t^
t = z i; i; i; < l a ii .ti tt a ui vi vt a a v\ ttt t\ ut a v\ th vt t\ U) u\ t1 th t/\ tlt vt
qs o- iii--- - r- ---r- --- - rrr------r- --1,^ - 2 z z ?, z. z- 2 z z z z z z z z z z z z 2 z z z z z. z 2 z z z z
3;85556555555855555555555555555565
o
R g g B " ? ZZ??>,>.>->*>->-tdtt?Zt t A?ZZ
U ur===E f ===
f
f f f >lf f lf f f f,f f zf lffAl393xOoooooouuuuIuuuuu (J u = u u u u
11 vl t! lJ u z r! !! uJ ur uJ uJ uJ n uJ uJ uJ uJ r! t! uJ ul !! uJ uJ t! u, uJ:
5==Z!;9d.P?99PP99??9?9?9?PgP?99?- o (r 5 - - z r t-a, t I ttt tll tt t^ tn tt t\ th vl ta t^ th tn v\ u) ta ti v\ t/\ v\ .n t^ t^
6-Zet t H * H !4 t{ H H HH H AAAAH HH S HH 3 H HH H B HH
Eq=4EEd;g=:EEEEEEEEHEEqEFEEEEHEHFq-
t 3i d r d m -r Fr (! (n ra i- Cn ri m st l./1 o !n o Fr o o o !n N.l rr q) Er r^ (oFxij { ra r,|.n i.j ij 6 d i5 ci 6 6 -r i .i ."r - N 6 fn < \o (o F. F @ @ ql 01 (n 01 ql
d = : di (6 .rr o (.o ro (o (o 6 16 6 (o \o (o ro ro (o (o (o (o o to ro \o (o (9 (9 (0 (o @ to
F J ;.j iii 6 fj { 6 6 6,5 6,o'o (o (o 16 r.o ro lo \o lD @ to (o (o (o to (o ro lo lo @ ro
v\
Fttn6hASPF
irex3U = ? e= B.^ 3 E;Fzr :l >!l a9 x -=ooZaE*i E= ug. .fr=Zii
uaiEEEEg=EEEEEEE=EEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: January, 19 2021
CC DATE: February 8, 2021
REVIEW DEADLINE: February 16, 2021
CASE #: PC 2021-07
BY: MYW
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing placing an at-grade deck outside their rear patio door approximately
one foot from the top of the bluff, reconstructing a failing retaining wall within the bluff, adding
a staircase to provide safe access to the lake, and replacing a water-oriented accessory structure
WOAS) with nonconforming area, bluff setbacks, side yard setbacks, and shoreland setbacks.
Since the deck and retaining wall are within the bluff, a variance is required; however, the stairs
and replacement of the nonconforming WOAS are permitted by City Code without a variance.
LOCATION: 6609 Horseshoe Curve
APPLICANT: Brian T. Bruner, Esq.
6609 Horseshoe Curve
Chanhassen, MN 55317
OWNER: Elise R. Bruner, Esq.
6609 Horseshoe Curve
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING: “RSF” – Single-Family
Residential District
2040 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density
ACREAGE: .64 acres DENSITY: NA
LEVEL OF CITY 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 relatively
high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from
established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
PROPOSED MOTION:
The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 19-foot bluff impact zone and
29-foot bluff setback variance for the construction of a deck, a bluff impact zone and bluff setback
variance for the construction of retaining walls within the bluff, and a 25-foot bluff, 5-foot side
yard, and 3-foot shoreland setback variance for a water-oriented accessory structure (WOAS),
subject to the Conditions of Approval, and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.”
6609 Horseshoe Curve
January 19, 2021
Page 2
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting 19-foot bluff impact zone and 29-foot bluff setback variance to install
an at-grade deck off of their rear patio door. They are also requesting a bluff impact zone and
bluff setback variance to allow for the reconstruction of retaining walls on the property. Finally,
they are proposing constructing a stairway down to the lake and replacing a nonconforming
WOAS. Only the first two of these items require a variance; however, staff is recommending that
the WOAS’s setbacks be included in the variance in order to formally document the
nonconforming setbacks. The applicant has stated that the intent of these variances is to provide
a usable area for outdoor recreation behind the home and to repair failing retaining walls.
The applicant has noted that larger more significant encroachments, i.e. a rear bump out, above-
grade deck, and patio, were present in the area where they are requesting a variance to install an
at grade deck prior to a 2018 remodel where these features were removed. They have noted the
removal of the previous features have left the rear area behind the house as an area of dirt and
weeds, without any improved area near the rear patio door. They have stated that adding a deck
would provide reasonable use of the area.
The applicant has stated that in 2020, boulders from the failing walls came loose and rolled down
the hill causing damage to their property. They have stated that if they are not permitted to
reconstruct the wall, they believe further erosion and damage will occur. Finally, they have noted
that they are proposing replacing one of the walls with a living wall system which they believe
will have significantly less impact than a traditional retaining wall.
The applicant has stated that the stairway system is being proposed to provide safe access to the
lake and that the WOAS is being reconfigured to align with the stairs. As was noted, neither of
these items require a variance from the City Code.
Staff recognizes that the applicant has provide a thoughtful proposal that does its utmost to
balance the owners’ needs with minimizing the impact to the bluff and lake. Furthermore, if the
applicant had proposed the deck as part of the initial remodel, a substantial portion of it could
have been approved without a variance as a reduction to an existing nonconformity.
Additionally, the condition of the existing retaining walls does require action and the applicant’s
proposed living wall solution is designed to address the safety and erosion concerns in a way that
improves the bluff relative to the existing conditions.
While the city is typically extremely hesitant to support variances permitting structures within
the bluff impact zone, the city has been receptive to variances for retaining walls designed to
address erosion in the past. Finally, this is a unique situation in that a bluff was not present on the
property when the home was constructed, but was created when the retaining walls constructed
along with the home increased the slope’s grade to an extent that triggered the bluff ordinance.
This change in conditions rendered previously conforming features nonconforming, and has
necessitated the variance process. For these reasons, staff is recommending approval of the
variance requests.
6609 Horseshoe Curve
January 19, 2021
Page 3
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 1, Section 1-2, Rules of Construction and Definitions
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3. Variances
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 4. Nonconforming Uses
Chapter 20, Article VII. Shoreland Management District.
Chapter 20, Article XII, “RSF” Single-Family Residential District
Section 20-615, Lot Requirements and Setbacks.
Chapter 20, Article XXVIII, Bluff Protection
BACKGROUND
General History
In April of 1999, the city approved a two-lot subdivision with variances allowing for a 20%
driveway grade and 81-foot shoreland setback.*
Note: At the time this subdivision was proposed, the ordinance required structures maintain the
shoreland setbacks of the adjacent properties. This requirement was subsequently repealed and
properties are subjected to the current 75-foot shoreland setback.
In July of 1999, the city issued a building permit for the construction of a single-family home.
In March of 2000, the city issued a building permit to add a deck.
In November of 2018, the city issued a building permit for a significant remodel which include the
demolition of the existing deck and patio.
In June of 2020, the city issued a building permit to add a rooftop deck.
Several permits for interior work and maintenance are also on file with the city.
Case History
On May 21, 2020, the designer contacted staff with a proposal for the site that included a large
concrete patio off the rear of the home, a concrete patio and large water oriented accessory structure
near the lake, and front yard parking pad.
On May 22, 2020, staff expressed concerns about the likely presence of a bluff on the property and
provided the designer with the sections of the City Code that they believed would apply to the
proposal. Staff indicated that the proposal would require multiple variances, and that a survey would
be required to determine the exact nature and extent of the variances.
On June 16, 2020, the designer sent a revised plan and requested a meeting with staff to discuss
potential variances.
6609 Horseshoe Curve
January 19, 2021
Page 4
On June 18, 2020, staff met with the applicant’s designer to discuss the proposed project. During the
meeting staff expressed concern regarding the proposed size and placement of the water oriented
accessory structure, proposed front yard parking, and presence of impervious surface within the
bluff impact zone.
On July 1 6, 2020, staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project. During the meeting
staff expressed concern regarding the proposed size and placement of the water oriented accessory
structure, but was supportive of the plans to stabilize the bluff and proposed pervious patio above
the bluff.
On November 20, 2020, staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project. The proposed
water oriented structure had been scaled back to address staff’s concerns.
On November 30, 2020, staff and the designer met to discuss the proposed project. No significant
concerns were raised.
On December 18, 2020, the applicant submitted the variance request.
SITE CONSTRAINTS
Zoning Overview
The property is zoned Single-Family Residential District, is located within the Shoreland
Management District, and is subject to the bluff protection ordinance. This zoning classification
requires riparian lots to be a minimum of 20,000 square feet, have front and rear yard setbacks of
30 feet, side yard setbacks of 10 feet, a shoreland setback of 75 feet, and limits parcels to a
maximum of 25 percent lot cover. Residential structures are limited to 35 feet in height, and
properties are allowed one water oriented accessory structure up to 250 square feet in size within
the 75-foot shoreland setback. Structures must be setback 30 feet from the top, side, and toe of
the bluff, and alteration of the land and vegetation within the bluff impact zone is heavily
restricted. Both the shoreland and bluff ordinance allow the construction of stairways, lifts, and
landings, subject to design criteria. A portion of the property is also encumbered by a sanitary
sewer easement.
The lot is 27,878 square feet with 6,377 square feet (23 percent) lot cover. The existing house
has a nonconforming bluff setback of between 5 and 19 feet, with a porch that encroaches into
the bluff. The property also features retaining walls located within the bluff impact zone. The
home’s WOAS is a nonconforming 308-square foot structure with a 3-foot bluff setback, 5-foot
side yard setback, and 7-foot shoreland setback. This WOAS is also located within the city’s
sanitary sewer easement. The house and other features appear to meet all other requirements of
the City Code.
Bluff Creek Corridor
This is not encumbered by the Bluff Creek Overlay District.
6609 Horseshoe Curve
January 19, 2021
Page 5
Bluff Protection
There is a bluff on the property. The city’s bluff protection ordinance requires structures to be
setback 30 feet from the top, toe, and side of the bluff and prohibits the alteration to land or
vegetation within the bluff impact zone, the area of the bluff and within 20 feet of the top of the
bluff. Stairways, lifts, and landings are permitted in areas where they will not redirect water flow
or increase drainage velocity so long as they do not exceed four feet in width and meet other
design criteria. Limited topographic alterations, grading, and filling within the bluff impact zone
is permitted through an earthwork permit, subject to standards designed to protect the integrity of
the bluff.
Floodplain Overlay
This property is not within a floodplain.
Shoreland Management
The property is located within a Shoreland Protection District. This district requires a 75-foot
structure setback from the lake’s ordinary high water level (OHWL) and limits the property to a
maximum impervious surface coverage of 25 percent. The shoreland ordinance permits one
WOAS to be located within the 75-foot shoreland setback, provided that it is at least 10 feet from
the ordinary high water level, no larger than 250 square feet, and has a maximum height of 10
feet. Stairways, lifts and landings providing access up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore
areas are also permitted so long as they do not exceed four feet in width, do not cause soil
erosion, and meet other design criteria.
Wetland Protection
There is not a wetland located in the development site.
NEIGHBORHOOD
Pleasant View/Alicia Heights
6609 Horseshoe Curve
January 19, 2021
Page 6
The plat for Pleasant View was
recorded in March of 1910 and
Alicia Heights, a two lot subdivision
within Pleasant View, was recorded
in June of 1999. Pleasant View is
one of the oldest neighborhoods in
the city and it predates the
establishment of the City of
Chanhassen and its ordinances. The
neighborhood is located on a
peninsula jutting into Lotus Lake
and this combined with challenging
topography meaning it has a large
number of atypically shaped lots,
many of which do not conform to
current city standards. Some of the
homes are original to the
neighborhood, while others are new
construction or have been
extensively updated. Many
properties have nonconforming
elements or have received variances
due to the age of the neighborhood
and atypical configuration of the
lots.
Variances within 500 feet:
6605 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1991-09): 17’ shoreland setback (deck) – Approved
6631 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1996-07): 15’ shoreland setback (addition and attached garage) –
Approved
6677 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1982-03): 25’ front and 7’ side setback (detached garage) –
Approved
6681 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1986-15): 6’ side setback (detached garage) – Withdrawn
PC 1987-03): 6’ side setback (detached garage) – Approved
PC 2002-10): 16’ front and 5’ side setback, 4% LC (detached garage
and addition) – Approved
6691 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1987-14): 19.6’ front setback (detached garage) – Approved
6697 Horseshoe Curve (PC 1985-02): 9.03’ side setback (addition, intensify non-conforming) –
Approved
6609 Horseshoe Curve
January 19, 2021
Page 7
ANALYSIS
At-Grade Deck
The applicant is requesting a variance
to place an at-grade deck
approximately one foot from the top
of the bluff. Initially, the applicant
had expressed interest in a patio made
of an impervious surface; however,
after staff expressed concern over the
placement of impervious surface
within the bluff impact zone, the
request was revised to feature a
surface comprised of pervious
decking, complete with drainage
system. It should be noted that prior
to the property’s 2018 renovation, a
144-square foot bump out projected 8
feet from the home for a 12-foot bluff setback, a 225-square foot above-grade deck projected out
15 feet from the existing porch and was located partially within the bluff, and an approximately
200-square foot concrete patio connected the deck and bump out within the bluff impact zone.
In comparison to the 2018 conditions on the property, the applicant is proposing replacing
approximately 344 square feet of impervious surface within the bluff impact zone and a 225-
6609 Horseshoe Curve
January 19, 2021
Page 8
square foot deck partially located within the bluff with approximately 652 square feet of pervious
decking setback one foot from the top of the bluff at its closest point. Since the nonconforming
deck, bump out, and patio were removed over a year ago, the applicant is not entitled to replace
them nor can the proposed deck be approved without a variance as a reduction to an existing
nonconformity; however, even if the requested variance is granted for the proposed deck, the
removal of impervious surface within the bluff impact zone and of the encroachment into the
bluff itself does represent an improvement to the original conditions present on the property.
A final factor in determining the appropriateness of granting a variance, is the fact that a bluff
was not present on the property when the home was built. In 1999, when the home was built,
there was a steep slope in the rear yard that did not meet the definition of a bluff. As part of the
permit to construct the home, a retaining wall was shown in the rear yard. This retaining wall
leveled off approximately 20 feet of the rear yard creating a steeper slope that met the definition
of a bluff. Since the original survey did not show a bluff on the property and as-built surveys
were not required at that time, permits were issued based on the fact that the available survey did
not show a bluff until the scope of work proposed in May 2020 triggered the need for a new
survey and the presence of a bluff was confirmed.
Ordinarily, staff would not support the construction of a structure within the bluff impact zone;
however, this is a very unique situation. The 2018 removal of the pre-existing structures has left
the area to the rear of the house as a patch of bare soil and weeds, meaning that many of the
ordinary concerns about removing vegetation within the bluff impact zone are not a factor, and
the applicant is proposing making significant improvements to prevent further degradation of the
bluff as discussed in the following subsection. Additionally, the applicant’s desire to have an
improved area outside of their patio door is reasonable and in keeping with what is present on the
surrounding properties. While the applicant’s proposed deck is larger than the minimum size
necessary to provide an improved surface off of the patio door, staff believes the requested
dimensions are reasonable in light of what was previously present on the property.
For the above reasons, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve a 19-foot
bluff impact zone and a 29-foot bluff setback variance to permit the construction of the proposed
deck.
6609 Horseshoe Curve
January 19, 2021
Page 9
Retaining Walls
The applicant is proposing to rebuild two
retaining walls within the bluff impact zone.
Both of these retaining walls are boulder
walls and the applicant states that the
southern retaining walls is failing with
boulders having come loose and rolling
down the hill during a June 21, 2020 rain
storm. They believe that if the wall is not
replaced, additional wall failures will occur,
causing the slope to suffer additional erosion
and possibly resulting in rocks and sediment
reaching the lake.
The applicant is proposing replacing the southern
retaining wall with a living wall system. The living
wall system will utilizes a type of geogrid replete with
plantings to anchor and support the slope. These
systems utilize both geogrid and root structure of the
plants to help prevent erosion, and the plant roots
have the added benefit of helping to absorb
stormwater. The applicant has stated that this type of
construction will require less material than a
traditional timber or boulder retaining wall. The
applicant is also proposing using fescue on the lakeside slope, as its relatively deep root system
makes it a good low maintenance option for the area.
Staff concurs with the applicant’s
assessment that the existing southern
retaining wall must be replaced, and
believes that the proposed living wall
system is a viable, innovative, and
environmentally responsible way to
shore up that section of the slope. Since
the living wall system requires regrading
that will extend the “retaining wall” area
further into the bluff, it is not considered
a simple replacement of an existing
nonconforming use and requires a
variance; however, staff believes the
proposal represents an improvement
over rebuilding the existing boulder
retaining wall within its current footprint, which could be done without a variance.
6609 Horseshoe Curve
January 19, 2021
Page 10
The applicant is also proposing removing a boulder retaining wall on the west
portion of the property and replacing it with a smaller concrete retaining wall.
The proposed western retaining wall is located almost entirely within the
footprint of the existing boulder retaining wall, and the majority of the existing
retaining wall running along the top of the bluff is being removed. While the
northwestern most corner of the new retaining wall will be located outside of
the existing footprint, it is the area furthest from the top of the bluff. The
applicant is also proposing a drainage system to help manage the stormwater
associated with the retaining wall. Since the existing western retaining wall
could be rebuilt in its current more impactful configuration without a variance
as a continuation of an existing nonconformity, staff believes that it is
appropriate to grant a variance to accommodate the less impactful revised
placement.
For the above reasons, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the
variance to permit the construction of retaining walls within the bluff impact zone.
Water-Oriented Accessory Structure (WOAS)
The property has a nonconforming WOAS
that is a combination of impervious patio and
pervious decking. This structure is
approximately 308 square feet, 58 square feet
larger than the maximum size permitted by
ordinance, and has a nonconforming 3-foot
bluff, 7-foot shoreland, and 5-foot side yard
setback. Additionally, the structure is located
overtop of a sanitary sewer line. The
applicant is proposing replacing this with a
smaller modular shoreline deck.
Since the proposed WOAS is 220 square feet,
entirely pervious, removable, and setback an
additional 2 feet from the toe of the bluff, this
is a clear reduction to the existing
nonconformity and does not require a
variance. Staff is including the structure’s
setbacks in the requested variance for the sole purpose of formally documenting the structure’s
nonconforming status and preventing any future confusion as to the legality of the structure’s
size, placement, and composition.
6609 Horseshoe Curve
January 19, 2021
Page 11
Impact on Neighborhood
Pleasant View is an older neighborhood with
many atypically shaped lots, nonconformities,
and variances. The applicant’s proposal will
result in a smaller nonconforming WOAS, a
stabilized slope, and the creation of an at-
grade deck approximately 92 feet from the
lake’s OHWL. The proposed deck will have
less of a visual impact than the deck and patio
that were present on the property before the
2018 remodel, and both the proposed
retaining wall and WOAS are smaller and
less visually obtrusive than what is currently
present on the property. The applicant has
also worked to create a proposal that is
minimally impactful to the property’s
environmental features. The use of a living
wall system instead of a traditional retaining
wall will help stabilize the bluff and should
prevent further erosion. None of the applicant’s proposed improvements will negatively impact
the neighboring properties or recreational users of Lotus Lake.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments,
approves a 19-foot bluff impact zone and 29-foot bluff setback variance for the construction of a
deck, a bluff impact zone and bluff setback variance for the construction of retaining walls
within the bluff, and a 25-foot bluff, 5-foot side yard, and 3-foot shoreland setback variance for a
water-oriented accessory structure, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and adopts the
attached Findings of Facts and Decision.
1. A building permit must be obtained before beginning any construction.
2. Building plans must provide sufficient information to verify that proposed building meets
all requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code; additional comments or
requirements may be required after plan review.
3. Retaining walls more than four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and
a building permit must be obtained prior to construction.
4. The applicant shall install tree protection fencing at the furthest point from the trunk as
possible around all trees within the grading limits.
5. The applicant shall file for an Encroachment Agreement with the city for any
encroachments within public drainage and utility easements.
6. The water-oriented accessory structure shall be constructed of modular, removable
decking for review and approval by the city prior to issuance of a building permit.
7. The improvements must substantially conform to the plans dated December 18, 2020.
6609 Horseshoe Curve
January 19, 2021
Page 12
ATTACHMENTS
1. Findings of Fact and Decision (Approval)
2. Variance Document (Approval)
3. Development Review Application
4. Variance Request Narrative
5. Variance Request Justification
6. Plan Set
7. Variance Documents
8. Landscaping and Tree Preservation Memo
9. WRC Memo
10. Engineering Memo
11. Affidavit of Mailing
g:\plan\2021 planning cases\21-07 6609 horseshoe curve\staff report_6609 horseshoe curve_var.doc