Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7B - Keyland Homes Variance MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREP ARED BY: REVIEWED BY: AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT - T v S LV iev-e;;rW .- j(- {/ .~ 1>~ ~0\V\ FEBRUARY 22, 2000 7B JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR DON RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION OO-XX UPHOLDING A DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE EXISTING KEYLAND HOMES BUILDING IN THE C-5 ZONING DISTRICT History: In January, 2000, the Planning Department received an application for a variance to allow the construction of an addition to the existing Keyland Homes building on the properly located at 17021 Fish Point Road in the Waterfront Passage Business Park. The existing building is setback 20' from the south property line, where it is adjacent to a Residential Zoning District. The proposed addition to the building will also have a 20' setback. Therefore, a 55' variance to permit a structure to be setback 20' from the side yard adjacent to a Residential District rather than the required 75 feet (City Code Section 1102.1406) was requested. On January 24, 2000, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the requested variance. The Planning Commission heard testimony from the applicant, Kevin Horkey representing Keyland Homes. There was no other testimony at the hearing. Upon reviewing the hardship criteria, the Planning Commission concluded there is a hardship with respect to this property in that the greater setback is a result of the annexation and rezoning of the adjacent property, and the location of the existing building limits the options for the placement of an addition. The Planning Commission thus approved the variance request. A draft copy of the Planning Commission minutes are attached to this report. On January 27,2000, n.R. Horton, Deerfield Development and John and Mary Mesenbrink, all owners of property within 350' of the site, submitted the attached letter appealing the decision of the Planning I:\OOfiles\OOappeaI\OO-O08\OO-008cc.doc 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Commission. This letter is consistent with the provisions of Section 1108.408 ofthe Zoning Ordinance. Current Conditions: The property located at 17021 Fish Point Road SE was originally platted as Lot 2, Block 2, Waterfront Passage Addition in 1993. In 1998, the applicant purchased an additionall/2 acre of land from the City Economic Development Authority and added it to their existing lot in order to construct an addition to the existing building, a~ shown on Exhibit A. The existing building was constructed in 1993 and met all required setbacks at that time. The property directly to the south was annexed in July, 1997. Late in 1997, the Comprehensive Plan was amended to include this property in the MUSA and designating it for Low to Medium Density Residential uses. In 1999, the property was rezoned to the R-2 district. Once rezoned, the 75' setback requirement from a Residential District became effective. The building envelope on the subject site meeting all setback requirements, shown on Exhibit B, is approximately 165' long by 135' wide. The building envelope is primarily located on the north half of the lot. The proposed addition is 150' long by 100' wide. It consists of a shop and warehouse space. The loading docks and parking are located on the north side of the building. The proposed addition is. located 20' from the south property line and 45' from the rear, or east property line. The setback from the south property line is consistent with the setback of the existing building. The Issues: The City Council must determine if it concurs with the Planning Commission's decision that the proposed development meets the hardship criteria. In the letter appealing this decision, the appellants state "the appeal is based on several inconsistencies in the application, and the fact that the criteria for granting a variance have not been satisfied." The letter does not include any specific or supporting information. On February 16, 2000, the staff received a second letter from the appellants outlining their arguments against the variance. Due to the late delivery ofthis letter, the staff was unable to provide an analysis of these points for this report. This analysis will be prepared and delivered to the City Council on Friday, February 18, 2000. The hardship criteria are listed in Section 1108.406 of the Zoning Ordinance. The following includes the hardship standard as well as a suggested finding relating to that standard. I :\OOfiles\OOappeaI\OO-008\OO-008cc.doc 2 1. Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a lot, or where by reason of exceptional topographical or water conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional conditions of such lot, the strict application of the terms of this Ordinance would result in peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such lot in developing or using such lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the Use District in which said lot is located. While the lot itself is not exceptionally narrow, the location of the existing building on the lot limits the placement of an addition to the building. If the addition were to meet all required setbacks, the options for the placement of parking and loading docks are very limited. This location would nearly eliminate the use of the building for warehouse purposes. 2. Conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to the property or immediately adjoining property, and do not apply, generally, to other land or structures in the Use District in which the land is located. The existing building complied with the required setbacks at the time it was constructed. The subsequent annexation and rezoning of the adjacent property created the additional setback requirement. 3. The granting of the proposed Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the owner. The property owner purchas.ed the property from the City for the express purpose of building an addition to the property. This addition cannot be built without granting of the variance. 4. The granting of the proposed Variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety. The addition conforms to the location of the existing building, and will not impair the supply oflight and air to the adjacent property. The addition will not significantly impact the public streets or endanger public safety. 5. The granting of the Variance will not unreasonably impact on the character and development of the neighborhood, unreasonably diminish or impair established property values 1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\OO-O08cc.doc 3 '--r"--"'" T in the surrounding area, or in any other way impair the health safety, and comfort of the area. The addition setback conforms to the setback of the existing building on this site. The required landscape bufferyard located along the south property line will provide screening between this site and the adjacent residential district. 6. The granting of the proposed Variance will not be contrary to the intent of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. The granting ofthis variance is not contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. When the applicant purchased this property, he entered into a development agreement with the City. That agreement notes the further development of this site by expanding the existing building is consistent with the development objectives set forth for the tax increment financing district. 7. The granting ofthe Variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable undue hardship or difficulty. The location of the existing building limits the options for the location of any addition to that building. The granting ofthis variance is necessary to alleviate a demonstraQle hardship. 8. The hardship results from the application of the provisions of this Ordinance to the affected property and does not result from actions of the owners of the property. The annexation and rezoning of the adjacent property created the need for the larger setback than originally required on this site. 9. Increased development or construction costs or economic hardship alone shall not be grounds for granting a Variance. This variance is not based on economic hardship. Conclusion: The Planning Commission and staff recommend approval ofthe requested variance on the basis the request appears to meet the hardship criteria in that the greater setback is a result of the annexation and rezoning ofthe adjacent property, and the location of the existing building limits the options for the placement of an addition. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval ofthe variance will allow the construction of an addition to the existing building, thereby increasing the tax base. I: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\OO-008cc.doc 4 ALTERNATIVES: RECOMMENDED MOTION: REVIEWED BY: 1 :\OOfi Ies\OOappeaI\OO-008\OO-008cc.doc The City Council has three alternatives: 1. Adopt Resolution OO-XX upholding the decision of the Planning Commission to approve the variance requested by Keyland Homes. 2. Deny Resolution OO-XX and direct the staffto prepare a resolution overturning the decision of the Planning Commission and denying the requested variance. 3. Defer this item and provide staff with specific direction. The staff recommends Alternative #1, adoption of Resolution OO-XX upholding a decision of the Planning Commission approving the variance request to allow an addition to the existing building to be located less than the re 'red 75' from the side lot line adjacent to a ResiOiS t. Frank Bo 5 T RESOLUTION OO-XX RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL UPHOLDING A DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A 55 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING BUILDING IN THE C-5 DISTRICT TO BE LOCATED 20 FEET FROM A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RATHER THAN THE REQUIRED 75 FEET MOTION BY: SECOND BY: WHEREAS, on February 22, 2000, the Prior Lake City Council considered an appeal by D.R. Horton Custom Homes, Deerfield Development, LLC and John and Mary Mesenbrink of the Planning Commission's approval of a request for a variance by Keyland Homes to locate an addition to the existing building at 17021 Fish Point Road SE 20' from the side lot line adjacent to a Residential District rather than the required 75' for the property legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, WATERFRONT PASSAGE ADDITION, Scott County, Minnesota together with that part of Lot 1, said Block 2, described as follows: Beginning at the southeast corner of Lot 2, Block 2, of said plat; thence North 00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds East plat bearing along the east line of said Lot 2, a distance of 228.00 feet to the northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence South 89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds East along the easterly extension of the north line of said Lot 2, a distance of 100.52 feet; thence South 00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of228.00 feet to the intersection with the south line of said Lot 1; thence North 89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds West along the said south line, a distance of 100.52 feet to the point of beginning. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the requested variance meets the standards for granting variances set forth in Section 1108.400 of the City Code, and that the appellant has not set forth adequate reasons for overturning the decision of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the Planning Commission's decision approving the requested variances should be upheld. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE: FINDINGS ..J:\OOfilj:$\OOa,ppl:al\OO-.o02.\rsOOX}(cc.doc . ..f,age L 16200 cagle ueeK twe. ~.c., ....rIor Lake, Mmnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (61L:) q.ll;-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 1. Kevin G. Horkey has applied for a variance from the Zoning Ordinance in order to permit the construction of an addition to an existing warehouse/shop building in the C-5 (Business Park) District located at 17021 Fish Point Road SE and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, WATERFRONT PASSAGE ADDITION, Scott County, Minnesota together with that part of Lot 1, said Block 2, described as follows: Beginning at the southeast comer of Lot 2, Block 2, of said plat; thence North 00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds East plat bearing along the east line of said Lot 2, a distance of 228.00 feet to the northeast comer of said Lot 2; thence South 89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds East along the easterly extension of the north line of said Lot 2, a distance of 100.52 feet; thence South 00 degrees 10 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 228.00 feet to the intersection with the south line of said Lot 1; thence North 89 degrees 49 minutes 16 seconds West along the said south line, a distance of 100.52 feet to the point of beginning. 2. The Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for variances as contained in Case File #00-002 and held hearings thereon on January 24,2000. 3. The Board of Adjustment concluded the variance met the hardship criteria and approved the request. 4. n.R. Horton Custom Homes, Deerfield Development, LLC, and John and Mary Mesenbrink filed an appeal to the decision of the Board of Adjustment in accordance with Section 1109.400 of the City Code on January 27,2000. 5. The City Council has considered the effect ofthe proposed variance upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community, the existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on property values in the surrounding area and the effect ofthe proposed variance on the Comprehensive Plan. 6. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding property, it is possible to use the subject property in such a way that the proposed variance will not result in the impairment of an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, unreasonably increase congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, and danger to the public safety, unreasonably diminish or impair health, safety, comfort, morals or in any other respect be contrary to the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. 7. The location of the existing building on the lot limits the location of any addition to this building. An addition meeting all required setbacks would nearly preclude any parking and loading areas for the building. 8. The City of Prior Lake Economic Development Authority entered into an agreement with the applicant for the purchase of the property with the express purpose of constructing an addition to the existing building. The Development Agreement states the development of this site is consistent with the goals and objectives ofthe Tax Increment Financing District. 9. There is justifiable hardship caused by the location of the existing building on the lot. Reasonable use of the property does not exist without the granting of the variance to permit the addition to be located consistent with the setback of the existing building. 1: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\rsOOxxcc.doc Page 2 10. The granting of the Variance will not serve merely as a convenience to the applicant, and is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship. II. The contents of Planning Case File #00-00 I are hereby entered into and made a part of the public record and the record of decision for this case. CONCLUSION Based upon the Findings set forth above, the City Council hereby approves the following variance for the proposed structure as shown in Exhibit A: 1. A 55' setback from the south property line rather than the required 75' setback.. The following are conditions which must be adhered to prior to the issuance of a building permit for the proposed structure: I. The resolution must be recorded and proof of recording submitted to the Planning Department within 60 days of the date of approval. An Assent Form must be signed and, pursuant to Section 1108.400 of the City Code, the variance will be null and void if the necessary permits are not obtained for the proposed structure within one year after adoption of this resolution. Passed and adopted this 22nd day of February, 2000. YES NO Mader Mader Ericson Ericson Gundlach Gundlach Petersen Petersen Schenck Schenck {Seal} City Manager, City of Prior Lake I: \OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\rsOOxxcc.doc Page 3 r ~ January 25,2000 Zoning Administrator City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE: Appeal to the City Council: Variance Key Land Homes Board of Adjustment decision of January 24, 2000 Dear Zoning Administrator: We are property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. We are filing an appeal to the variance granted by the Board of Adjustment at it's January 24,2000 meeting. We make this appeal in accord with Section 1109.400 Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance. The appeal is based on several inconsistencies in the application, and the fact that the criteria for granting a variance have not been satisfied. Sincerely, _~_~m:: Donald Patton Manager Land Development D rn@rno \YJ. ~ In ~ JAN2131!k U :'~ --~'----r-~ i~1 FED 16_ j~ Honorable Mayor & City Council City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. Prior Lake, MN 55372 RE: Appeal, Variance Key Land Homes Dear Mayor and Council: Midwest Planning & Design, LLC was asked to review the application for variance and to prepare a letter to the Council. In our review of the information supplied to us, we have found the following: . There are several additional variances, which are required and which have not been applied for . The criteria for granting a variance to the side yard requirements of the City Ordinance have not been satisfied. . There may be a conflict with the City Council acting on an appeal and also members serving on the EDA, which sold the property to the applicant. Also, there is a conflict with the City Staff recommending a variance and providing staff services to the EDA. At your February 22nd, meeting, you are being asked to approve a variance to the required yard of an industrial building which is adjacent to D.R. Horton residential development, Deerfield. We are asking you to deny the requested variance. The request for a variance is clearly an attempt on the part ofthe applicant to over use the adjacent property to the determent offuture homeowners and to the determent ofnR Horton and the Messenbrinks. Midwest Planning & Design, LLC representing the adjacent property owner makes this request to deny the variance for the following reasons: 1. n.R. Horton's new residential homes are required to maintain a yard and to provide a landscaped buffer yard. We diligently provided this separation and the landscaping knowing that the requirement from the adjoining property would be 75 feet for any new buildings. D.R. Horton also purchased this property with the understanding that although the existing industrial structure was only 20 feet away from property any new structures would be required to be 75 feet from the south property line. We also understood that the City performance standards would help the interface between these land uses. A variance to this standard will have a negative affect on n.R. Horton's development and the Messenbrink's property and on the value ofthe homes to be built. 2. We are required to provide class one construction on the to be built homes. The Councils intent of requiring class one is to make our "for sale" owner occupied homes appear attractive from the adjoining property including this industrial property. Yet the adjacent user is allowed to build a high bulk metal building only 20 feet from south property line. This standard is inconsistent. Although section 1102.1407(2) Additions and Alteration. Provides that the addition should be made of the same Midwest Planning & Design, LLC -_._.~...,..._..... .....-r'~...._._._-'".....................~.__......,...'-'--"'-"'-"---- materials as the principle structure, it is hard to believe that the Council's intent was to allow a metal building 20 feet from the property line adjacent to a residential use. 3. The purpose of required yards especially as separation from incompatible land uses is to create buffers. Your ordinance realizes this requirement and requires additional space and landscaping between incompatible land uses. Yet this application is to vary the standard that is so important to maintain property value and habitable space for new residents. The staff report indicates that this property was purchased before the zoning was changed to residential. This is true. However, both the EDA and the Applicant were aware that the Messembrink land was planned for residential use before the ~ acre was sold to the Applicant. The sale occurred in 1998. The Township land use on the Messenbrink property has been residential for a number of years. The City's Comprehensive Plan showed this property as low to medium density residential use in late 1997. 4. The existing building is a non-conforming structure. Based on the following Sections of the Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance, the proposed expansion is illegal. . Section 1107.2302 (2) "A nonconformity shall not be enlarged, extended, expanded or changed in any manner or dimension except to comply with provision of this Ordinance". Expansion of this nonconforming structure is illegal unless the City grants a variance to this section of the Ordinance. . Section 1107.2303 Special Requirements. (2) Nonconforming Structures. a. Permitted construction. "In the following cases, construction is permitted on a legal nonconforming structure. Construction, which does not extend, expand, or intensify the nonconformity. The existing building a nonconformity and is being allowed to expand with out a variance to this section of the Ordinance. This is clearly illegal. . Section 1107.2303(5) Nonconforming parking. "Any use on any property which contains a nonconforming parking lot shall not be expanded or intensified unless the property is brought into compliance with the standards contained in subsection 1107.204." The existing parking lot is nonconforming in that it is 20 feet from Fish Point Road. The requirement in this zoning district is that the parking lot be at least 30 feet from Fish Point Road (Sectionlll 02.1406). Section 1107.204 requires that parking abutting an "R" District be at least 20 feet from the side lot line and a Type "c" buffer yard be provided adjacent to the parking lot. The applicants existing parking is less than 20 feet from the side lot line. The Zoning Ordinance requires that this parking lot be brought into conformity. The prop_osal does not show that the existing parking lot is being brought into conformity. Likewise, the Ordinance's required buffer yard is not being provided adjacent to the existing parking lot. 5. Not only is this an application for a yard variance, but the proposal seems to vary several zoning performance standards with out application for a variance. We understand that these variances have not been applied for but they will affect the relationship between the properties. We suggest that this application be sent back to the Board of Adjustment so they can act on all of the variances at the same time. The ordinance clearly requires variances to the following section to allow this building to be built on this lot: Midwest Planning & Design, LLC . Besides the specific performance standards, the proposed use does not conform to the following Standards: . Section 1107.305 there is no indication from the plan provided to us that the requirement for off street parking and loading are met. . Section 1107.1904 There is not indication from the plan furnished to us that the landscape requirements are being met. · Section 1107.2202 (1) there is not indication from the plan furnished to us that the standards for roof top equipment is being met. . Section 1107.2202 (6). There is not indication from the plan that required class I material is being used. Nor is there a description in the staff report, which indicates that these standards have been met. Section 1102.1407 (2) requires that "all subsequent additions and exterior alterations shall be the same as those of the principal structure...This provision does not prevent upgrading of the quality of material". The City Staff is interrupting this section to mean that a non-conforming structures can be enlarged with a side yard variance. This interruption is wrong. The existing structure is a nonconforming structure. Section 1107.2300 clearly provides that this existing structure must be brought into conformity to be allowed to expand or intensify. . Section 1107.2202 (8)(t). From the plan furnished to tis there no indication that pedestrian areas are provided as required by the Ordinance. 6. In the interface of incompatible land uses it is important to maintain separation not only for the livability of the residential property but also the usability of the industrial property. Standards are important to be maintained by both parties so that the industrial user, the resident and the city are provided the longest and highest value from the property. Variances are not the rule but the exception. 7. We know from experience that the over use of property with building or parking lot has determaental affects on the surrounding property and the city. These affects are as follows: . Blighting influences on the industrial and residential property because of not enough room to provide busiI1ess operations and to provide effective yards between buildings and uses . Blighting influences because of the lack of parking and the use of the public street for over flow parking which has been the case for a number of years in this under designed industrial park. . Blighting influences because of the not enough room to provide public fire protections because of the reduced yards, which are filled with landscaping. One of the reasons to have larger yards is to provide both landscaping buffers and a means of fighting fire . Surface water run off is increased because of the lack of impervious surface. Midwest Planning & Design, LLC _.._-".."....,......~.......... The State Legislature has realized that the variance is a tool that can be only used if ''undue hardship" exists. The City Ordinance requires that all nine conditions for granting a variance must be met in order for the Board of Adjustment to grant a variance. The following conditions have not been met: 1. There is not an undue hardship as defined by the City Ordinance or by the State Statute. This is not an extra ordinary exception as is required by the city ordinance. This lot is simil$' to most of the lots in the industrial area. The property owners simply wants to over use this lot and not adhere to the city standards which are meant to protect other property owners in the area. 2. Conditions applying to this structure or to the land are not peculiar to this property. The applicant and EDA were aware that the adjacent land was planned residential when the property was purchased for the expansion. It is unlikely that this is the only property in Prior Lake where the interface between land uses does not conform to the existing ordinance. 3. This property is being used at the present time. The property owner is not being denied the use ofhis property. . Granting the variance will increase the danger of fire and will endanger public safety. With only 20 feet between property rather then the required 75 feet the ability to fight fires on the south side of the metal building is impaired when the required landscaping matures. . Granting this variance including harm to the ability to sell adjacent property will impact the neighborhood. Granting this variance will reduce the value of the adjacent property. Like wise, the proposed building is not too standard as it relates to the architectural design standards, Section 1107. By not requiring a variance to these standards and the nonconformity standards, the Board of Adjustment violated the City Ordinance. . Granting this variance will not be in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan, which requires buffers between land uses. and requires high design standards . This variance is to serve the convenience of the applicant. An undue hard ship as defined by the State in the Enabling Legislation does not exist. Reasonable use of the property can be made with out granting the variance. . The hard ship results from the actions ofthe owners to over use the property. Granting this variance will do harm to the value of the adjacent residential property and to the general welfare ofthe community as well as to the public safety. For his reason we are asking the City Council to deny the variance. Sincerely, Midwest Planning & Design, LLC ;g I ~ H ~ ~~~l JV~~!. ~"--\S Richard Krier, AICP CC D.R Horton Homes Donald Rye Midwest Planning & Design, LLC 17021 Fish Point Road 4 o 400 800 Feet -. ....." WATERFRONT PJlSSAGE 2ND ADO'N ~ N .~ <C I- - to - J: >< W CD ~ 0> I iii OlD ~~ "'I&. .~ i ... o _ .MOt ..- - i~ ,!. ~~ CO - lD Co ~~'N NC _ ... lD N::l! ..., ,,/- " " ":-..::... -..::... ~ CD ~ CD ,... ~ I&. tJ 0 :i.. CD 0'" CD -:; I i;g -8,::l! ,... J: .~ .,.,.5 _ N.2 CO "'''' ..., I i d . ~ I ; ~ ! ~ DI C IEL WU lIf-W ~-Ie *Zm* . 9 C lIf- *o.U. -Ie.* ('~ ... 0 ... -' ~ "- WN i!:... -<::l! ZW ~g -'" -<-< "'w J: ~:5 0>- ... >-0 ~~ s5ffi 8 t;w -'... "', ~< ~:J :>u '~~ < "';!: oll> '" ~a: w"'a: "'0 i ,-,zw ~z / 0 ~ ~~~ .. "- ~ . -<'" a:-<>- . ow'" (f) W ~ o :c o z <( -.J >- W ~ , / v () () j.. _...J ('(' _ !...J OVO~ lNIOd HSI.:J ~ ! " gCl ~% :l~ Ul.> ,,% ~; ~; ~ ::J.... ; !~ c "C ~ ~:l ~ !~ IS ...~ 15 ~5 .. i~ ! ~~uI ili ,:! .. g~~ ~ ....2 !l i5...a I ~~! i~~ ..% IE ~~ Iii Iii ~ ~ ,. "'l;( 9~ i~ o !~ . 0:3 ~.E" i!~~ ~!iil i5~l lIlCl~ ..~,. ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ;j: ;r~.E "Ol~ ~w~ .E.. ~3;; ...,.l;( lll~o o!l!i %01.. ~ il' '" ~ o '" ~ ~ i5 ... ~ ~-< ~ ~ ~ ~ cl ! ~ I ~...: ~ -= i~ )- ~ ~~ ; ! l;~ ~ ~ 20: e ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~! j i gi ~ ~ "'~ U l'1 l:ll;( g ; u ~ ~ Iii Iii Iii 000 % % % c o "- .. % ~~ %~I:l 3il!i1'" i!~:'la ~,. ~ ~d~~ "' ~ini..;i y:~Ug ciUii!i2 ;;;;1;; OOO~iO .~Hn~ HlltH >. Q) > '- ::J (/) ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d d d a: ~ '" 8 g < -' -J -' "- '" '" ... "- w '" 0 ~ ~ a. '" 00< -J ... '-' "- o Q) .... o u ;;: .... '- Q) u 7~ Iii o % I IN I I'" \ / g I' " ... Cl '" o u w '" , ,/ ,/ N :an ~ci T""" V w :> a: ... o ~ .. .~ ; ::l!,g ,,:,] c.. 50 u" .. :::2 ~ 8b "':l S .", o aN ~ ~ a:: 25~ <1. 00 z <l(m o ~:2 ~ < 0 <1. "," ~ ~..: w a._ o ......3 -' a-o < '" '-' "-- W '" ~ .oJ ~8. h J: N- ...:5 ::: OJ a;~ .. N= .. -00 00 -'- I- Z w d < !!! '" w ::l! o J: ~~ <0 S!'" w~ "'" < 00 ...z >-8 ~'" "'w tJi!: >-,,- "'0 w "'>- ~~ '" ~~ if ~~ . --'-. 0) ~~%:::~ ~ @ ~ 2' ~ - '" '" w '" ~ ..j ~ ~, g" z ~ ~ ~ .3 o " '" '" < ... 0- W U )( W UI ui ... z ~d J:8 ~N ~> "a: u< z:> wZ -< ",,, 0,,- ",0 ...>- z-< '::;10 ~;!: :i1'" <1.", ::l!- -J: ... ~z ,,0 "'UI 0:> ...a: w ...<1. "':> 0'" o ... "'u ::>w <1.", bO z>- ",::l! Wa: OW 00 t:~ o (; ON " ~ '0 ~ ~ o~ t:-'CCI:s:~~ ~.~ ~ g :: ~~ u lI'lI 0 _ ~- u_V)u~&O' jO 3:51:"~ -.55oo~o i;=:s::: Q,o ..'ii u:=3:a. :2 : :! ;. :~.~ ~:5~:~.2g.g. '0 0'.'2 ~8 i~.x ..g~; ~VI_ N '6 _ Vi = .!~ 0 ~ g' ~ 2 ~ .S :s in'~ E:5 " :S -; & .. u 0 U c:: u : ~ ~ g'j 2'E:5 o E '" ~ - -en 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .;:: ~ ~ ~ s.! 8 :.! E~ C:~~~~N o 'g ~"Cd N"~ U a - 60 _0'18 -uou-oco_ ~ ~ : :: '0 e='O .c. uCO.c.li ~..!-u~:: "::o:~ug _ 0 - III "C u_ ~.~ ~.~:o o~~ _ENEow-o 00 o~NI.::. .~: ~ .. '0 .go~ ~::c:...Jc:-'.c "t 5-'; ~~ 8:2"5 Q)~~-3~=~~ .... w W La. o co J: U :; W ..J <( U Vl ~ o .; o to r- Ot ~ m 1-, - m - :c >< LLI ~ at I lO 0'" ~~ "'"" -!3 ~ o ... .,; at ..- ... 'C -!S. I p.'\!' ... !~~ c" ...-,.... N-3 N ~H; "'::1'-' ('~ / I <.. " I' / .../...... <.././ ;.. 'oJ ...... ,'C ....~ -~ i ~ ..... ~ "" \J 0 i...~ ,~ l~"'" X oi-c;j' (/) l!J~~ W ",ID'-' 2 o :r: o z <( ~ W ~ I! II .~ I , . !I ! "\ '" " -- () () --' ('(' _W L: o .... >. v > \... :J (/) .... o v ...... o U :0:: :;J \... V U "'N ~... ~9 ,.,~ ~~ ~:J '''is I!!", ~o ...Z I L :1 : .--? ~ / b ... <../ / ~ ~ ,__ ^ 'oJ ...... 0 ~~ ' .:...' ",';'" ~ ~~ '" - c- \...... :J 2", ( ,. ( .......J j!: tf::Jffi -,) j..""" ~ l!lSiS (>) ............ "\'"'.~ ~o~ -' r ...... " "'~lD '" C c... J ; [) i C\~ ;: i : \V, .~Y: . " . '< ' \ ;oO.Sll\\ !M..t~O ~.OOS~ .. . ~o :JI!! F< :;,U < .Ill> <11 ......'" "zw ~~5 0(<11 "'<>- O...ID ,. IN I , ... I 0 \, -' I' "- " 0 , a: o u w ": I I " " avo~ lNIOd HSI.:I \ \ \ !!h ~ ~ z 5h~... ~Hlmii ~ s ~ 11II1I ~ ~ i ! ! II l tt T ~ A ~ z g "Ill "" jO 92 ~ ~~ "l;! i l!1i !o 0 '" ~~ !:;. I!! ~ i; ~d i ~ ~:itA. A3i ~ ~ ~ I! ~~: i ~ i l!iii !.!~~:~ l!l !.! fi"\!! %~i ~I: ~. ~ ~ ~~ ~~! i~ 1 ! i ~l:e."~ ~ i ~~'" 9;l~ !~ ~ ~ . i ~a i03~ ~~ ~ ~ i i~! aii \!!! ~ j ; Ali~ b; II ~ ~ ~ ..~ e.~2 ..1:1 e: I f ~~ ia~ d ~ := t!t! t! t! t!t! i ~ i i i i ... :> ~ < !!! ... < a is F '" Go 'i 5 o III :z: ~ 0" ~ ~ :i ~ '" u w\!! ~ "'0:: <( e~ to FID "'w tl~ >-... IDO ... tr:>- ~~ ~~ .~ ~ ~_. ~ r;1 I:::J ~ @ ~ p;-:::~ . "-:::)0' ID o w ~ tr: ~ '" < t- '" N '" ~ ~ o :z: <11 '" < ... ... w u x w iii ... z 'i~ ~N ~~ o~ ~~ "'-. 0,,- ",0 '%?c 'io ~~ lil'" Go", ;!;!; :J OZ XO "'li'i ~~ w ...Go ",:;, 0'" &~ ~.~ bO z>- ",::I ~ffi 00 ,;:5 li'i " I- W ~ '0 g'" u _ 0 .z: '0 01 ~ o:g CD t:-''''.s:.s~ n ~:g.s~,.-. .ll ~ c~:5:5 :I: U_VJO~'O' U .: 0 ~:5"s g 5 ~ - ~ 500."'6 ff-:5 _:5-;; ~v; .5".1:0, Q.3N1:~3:g' ~ :g u - .! g. 5':;.2 < S5.3 :'U~5'5. ~ '0 g' 1 ~8 ~:1-x N.20 .. ~:5 bU) '0 -" -- is '" 0 II a.s..s ,g"€ ~..v V1 '. ~~ro ~ll ~:5:::5~: N D u 0'5 "~fe:5 ;;;; 'Wi 5:5 -'" 0 :~ ~:;;.;:: ~ ~ ~ B.! 8 :1 "laJ cW"", '"& ~; ".:; "1 ~-:;~ uli:5ljg_",g v;~.s~-om- g"_"o8:5"O :5" .....!ili. &.... ..! - u _% u V2 ~';~:6d -i '5"~"~j:o o$:a 0 _ E '" E " -;;:5 " ... 00 O~N~::. ~ "[: :I .. D ';0:3 01 .~ :: !i:-' 5-':5 go ~ Wi ~:2 u:2:J ~..."'!:: . m .:; ~ .; a = s g t~ " ;; .. u ,~ ; ::10 ,.:,~ ~ c.. ... il" i3 uil :::~ >- o~ m rX: e ." ~ aN ~ ~-e Go 00 <lii ~:2 :\2 '" . <- Go_ ,%.3 ~'O ...- a:~ ~g, ~;; .J: ",- ...:5 g "i lii~ u t'i5 u -... ~2 z <( .... G- "'W I- - tJ'J \- \ ~.. .~ $1:)el!~ . .lQuun PfAea ~I ~ I hlf~. --......- ~~ rw,., ;;u,. .f f ill a l' " ~ . Iii I ~ i: I ; t-t- 1 ij II, ~t Ii.; r h H:I~R~ -E;,: :! S~ H:'il I J' ; 1 !~. t'i ca~lrl ~ 12,^,: 'tl~ ~ ,8.: Ii "4~~. $_ . .~u~ 1/~I~"I'i ~ i I IIi 'I~ li~~rllfiB J t.ri!~~!1 !.;.. ;". . Jj~lila&1 II! 6 r ~ II hh J I.; ti: ~J ... , \. t 11~; tI) I~U W:< Ii" ~ t) ~O~ z:I:~ o 1: ;:: . gag -<Z..J ~-<Ii z-JO -<)-l OJ )[ s ~ lIt M I III B : lis!!, I olIi1 -~ III i In cd I4dev:t'a IZI0ec n '~r ~ ~ ': 'ON 3NoHd Sl=>311~ ~3NNIl aI()tjq : ~.:l PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 2000 1. Call to Order: The January 24, 2Q00, Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chairman Cramer at 6:30 p.m>'l'hose present were Commis~ners Cramer, Criego, Stamson and Vonhof, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, ZOIftng Administrator Steve Horsman and Recording Secretary COrnlie Carlson. / , / , //' '\ /' , " V onhof /\ Present Criego // '\ Present Cramer .// \\ Present Stamson // "\" Present / \\, 3. Approva~Minutes: '\. The Minutes.rr{m the January 10, 2000, Planning ~ission meeting were approved as presented. / 2. Roll Call: ., '. 4. Public Hearings: ~ A. Case File #00-001 Keith Horkey of Keyland Homes is requesting a variance to the required side yard setback adjacent to a residential district in the C-5 (Business Park) District for the construction of an addition to an existing building on the property located at 17021 Fish Point Road SE. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated January 24, 2000, on file in the office of the Planning Department. The Planning Department received an application for a variance to allow the construction of an addition to the existing Keyland Homes building on the properly located at 17021 Fish Point Road. They are requesting a 55' variance to permit a structure to be setback 20' from the side yard adjacent to a Residential District rather than the required 75 feet. Staff felt the proposed request appeared to meet the hardship criteria in that the greater setback is a result of the annexation and rezoning of the adjacent property, and the location of the existing building limits the options for the placement of an addition. The staff therefore recommended approval of this request. Comments from the public: L:\OOFILES\OOPLCOMM\OOPCMIN\MN012400.DOC 1 Planning Commission Minutes January 24. 2000 Kevin Horkey, Keyland Homes, explained the company needs additional storage would like to expand and this is the only way to do it. The public hearing was closed. Comments from the Commissioners: V onhof: . Agreed with Stamson on the variance hardship st . The annexation caused the hardship. . Supported the requested. . ding. Kansier said they were building dinance requirements. Stamson: . The City marketed and sold the property with this in mind. . Staff pointed out the variance meets all the criteria. . Supported the request. Criego: . Hardships have been met. . Agreed with staffs recommendation. BY STAMSON, APPROVING RESOLUTION 00- CE TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF UILDING IN THE C-5 DISTRICT TO BE SIDENTIAL DISTRICT RATHER THAN THE by all. MOTION CARRIED. 5. A. Case File #99-100 Hillcrest Homes Variance - Resolution Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman presented the Planning Report dated January 24, 2000 on file in the office of the Planning Department. On January 10, 2000, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the requested variances on this property. After reviewing the proposal with respect to the I :\OOfiles\OOplcomm\OOpcmin\mnO I 2400.doc 2 Memorandum TO: FROM: Frank Boyles, City Manager Jane Kansier, Pianning COOrdinator~ February 18, 2000 Additional Information for Council Agenda Item 7B, Keyland Homes Variance DATE: RE: cc: Don Rye, planning Director On February 16, 2000, we received a letter from Dick Krier, on behalf of the appellants, D. R. Horton and John and Mary Mesenbrink, outlining their objections to the variance for Keyland Homes. The variance will allow Keyland Homes to build an addition to their existing building that will be located 20' from a residential lot line rather than the 75' required in the C-5 District. This letter was included in the agenda materials; however, the staff did not have time to respond to this letter before the agenda was mailed. The following is our response to the relevant points of this letter. Mr. Krier claims the building materials used for this addition are inconsistent with the Ordinance requirements. Section 1107.2202 lists the general requirements for architectural materials. The C-5 district, however, has a specific set of design standards for buildings in that district. These standards are listed in Section 1102.1407. According to this section, metal panels with interlocking, concealed or tongue-and-groove seams and concealed fasteners are an acceptable building material in the C-5 district if the exterior finish is warranted by the manufacturer for twenty years against blistering, peeling, cracking, flaking, checking or chipping and ifnot more than 50% of the building elevation faces the street. The attached description of the building material for the Keyland building shows that it is clearly consistent with the requirements ofthe C-5 district. In addition, Section 1102.1407 (2) specifically references additions and alternations to buildings within the C-5 district constructed of materials that do not conform to the current requirements. This section states "all subsequent additions and exterior alterations built after the construction of the principal structure(s) shall be of the same materials as those used in the principal structure 1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\response.doc Page I 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER and shall be designed to conform to the original architectural concept and general appearance. This provision shall not prevent the upgrading of the quality ofmaterials used in a remodeling or expansion project". This section also allows the materials used in the proposed addition. Mr. Krier also references the nonconforming requirements (Section 1107.2300) of the Zoning Ordinance and suggests variances to these requirements are also necessary. It is true that the setback ofthe existing building is nonconforming. This setback cannot be expanded without a variance to the setback requirement, as requested by Keyland Homes. The setback variance is the appropriate variance. A variance to the nonconforming provisions is unnecessary and redundant. Mr. Krier also references Section 1107.2303 (5) which pertains to nonconforming parking areas. First of all, he is correct in stating the setback of the existing parking area from Fish Point Road is nonconforming (20' instead ofthe required 30'). However, this section of parking lot is not being expanded. No parking will be located closer to the right-of-way than the existing area. A portion of the existing parking lot is also located closer than 20' to south property line where it is adjacent to a Residential district. Again, this section ofthe parking lot will not be expanded. All new parking areas will meet the requirements ofthe ordinance. Finally, this letter suggests the following criteria have not been met: . Section 1107.305, off-street parking and loading. The use requires 49 parking, spaces and one loading space. There are 59 parking spaces and at least 4 loading spaces on the site. . Section 1107.1904, landscaping. The use requires a Bufferyard Type "E" along the south property line for the length of the new building. This landscaping is provided. . Section 1107.2202 (1), rooftop equipment. There will be no rooftop mechanical equipment. . Section 1107.2202 (8,t), pedestrian areas. A total of936 square feet of sidewalk or plaza is required. The existing sidewalks meet this requirement. The criteria used to grant a variance are addressed in the agenda report. 1:\OOfiles\OOappeal\OO-008\response.doc Page 2 "-~.... .', " ~ .. ,- ""~"___'-""__"";;"~~~"-';-'--'oo. ~~~..-,;,....___w_....._____......__._.~_ _~~___.__~.....~""________... ..._________._--;_"_-:-_~. __...__~__._______~,~-..:...- . '.~~f:i-1 . .,. . VP 002' . r;""'lt'thi' ....lfC"'Ih".~' ,. '"("'1' "'~'~;~'~"fihlatt'.Jr'Tt-.tl'" .,,' '\;~~""'~"'"~~~";':''''~~''''1.,~i''~.f'' . . ,'. .~~~~;,~~~~~: ~:;,:~:~>@~.,.:~~~~~~~:~7Urr:r@~~~'~~~~~~{{~;''1J; ". {,~\ :'. .j'\"~;1~""" ..:t~{.t~!~il~'~$);~;7:~<~:~;~':fI~I:~~ . GENE RAt DESCRI~TI.ON :;;':,\;!~7;"jfoui1dati()h.tcf.ea~e 'In)Tiost.,:\.:;?:':;~2,!;j!,~~~tKEY. BENEFITS .,:>:;:t':';;,1{: The unique'~es.ign~fY~'s", .",' ';faCili~i~~::j,'!t:~i;l):'1j~~~;{#r;y[r:;,"; :;~~~:,~4~f."'iArchit~ctL'ral A" ;~~r~~'c architectural wall pa~els provides ::>Because .ofthe pan!3I'~ rength.-..\,i:.,;~~' ";" ",.; 'C', -, ;.... . Pp,<~. ',,,,,,- for many attractive building . . and 'e'as'e'ofinstajlali6'rrconstrui::~;i!~;,&:..;;lnt~rIP~.ft.-ppllca.tlp!lS :,\,,{. . applications: VP100 isa . . ,tion time 'al1dcosfis'hefcf toa':ri!~~~i{i....l~~t ppns~ru~tl.on . .', ' . 'sculptured exterior shadciw panelmi.nimu~Tn1y()urbullCiilig'ls ':\:':~0~Jf'-;:;. .~E~ergy Efficient which can be used with interior . .. therefOl'tr:mofe-~~onon;icaiandn~:;"..~.':~'Ec6nomical Cost I~ner. panels in. c.om~i9ati?ll. wit~ .re~9.Y)!~{P.~i;m.?i~:.9~g~!~:~~"p f.~,~:~;:!J,~:!;'~r~~'fi~';:t{:~ ..~;jt!;?i<;: f::;/,'::': '.' ...., . fiberglass or rigid board Insulat:on~.:.Jh~~El,y!aU;sY,st~g1~,~r~JI)~1.8 ":1;-' ...... , . . .~hhj"ti.:,:.c,:,.~ii,.,:..:;':.,~. : Thjs attractive pa~el is'excellent:}F~?~~,~~!~~~n~~~~J~1~~It~~~:~V:\~t1i~~~f .v'. for facade and bUilding frontage:..,\m~S.ol'!~:i?r.~,QQQfal~~~D?tl~~S.; ~:.{i~~f' aoplications. ..,..,.., _~".",.t+..,.......",~....,.~'\....~ .i~",",.. . ., VP 002 is a flush panel used either externally or as a liner panel, especially appropriate for mailufacturin~.\'/arehous3 interior applications. This panel is excellent as an accent panel for . 'VP ,1.90 walls and is widely used for facade's and soffits. With the variety of insulation options available. your Builder can help you decide on the optimal insulation approach, considering up-front cost and long term energy savings. These interlocking panels come with built-in weather seals for weathertightness. All fasteners are completely., concealed on VP 100 and VP 002.?~ panels. VP 100 panels cOlne in a: ,':;e wide variety of colcirs:.yp 002 .....,1~~~; panels are' available in, E.gypti~Q';:;;!if~~ White and Patrician. Bronze a~:f::~,:f"" standard. . Also; th~se 'panels'~2:,;~ come in lengths to'38f~eti provia-,. inQ a continuous wall panel from"';:'~r' .. 0". "_..." >,:_..:}<,,-"-..~,.' ""', >>..:/'::;~~.~~:. ....." [:~&~POO~~' ., ;~TECHNICAL INFORMATION ~::t("VP100and VP002 wall panels provide 12 Ir .:. not CI:"." .t \.~1h. ';;~ith:'l.erigthsof up to 38 feet. Panels are:?P T'~~' . .. ..'" ~~:lr. ;;;pptiOh,al) forVP 10(1 ana 24 gage stan'jet:, ,'~~' w :.~~;lQnal) lor VF '. '002. Both panels rave a G90 galvanized steel coating and KXL paint "finiSh for-exterior a'.:>plications. KXL Is a 1 miL KYNARt based finish ;;;appiied to the sOrface of G90 galvanized steel to givE. a long-life color <t~~~ r~sists fading and chalking. . . _..___'_ .11" ' ,..:.....:....; -"--C-' ~..,.o.,.....~-' "--'.'--'" '---". .., .- -..- .- ... ,'.. -..------..-. --:-. I J[Rlj!~;.;,. '<'VP100NP 002 PANEL CROSS SECTIONSt ~f;~F:. '. '., ,.~ _~ ,C . ~ "~.;-... .. , ; '/'1<. . - .- ;, ,~ ". " " ,f:f{;;,.,. .. d l"i" 'I. l~: ,)1:[7 ~. . . /-I :o;.!"i I ' >:J~"... . L .l[: ....~,"'.. ... ~ ,..' , . .. . ~~~[;~~:;'~}"r~' . ;~if~t:'>"~E~~k;~- P;~;~~~~ES-~~ ~-;;CHI~E6~URAL ;~~EL~' ; )})\~",> .... ,,'(For One Foot of Width) ..... '.' , ,,;~. , .~ ' .~", ,'.. ',' 'I"" " FINISH WARRANTIeS , KXL:'20years ': "..Q" VARCO.PRUDEN AND .THE VP CONT.RACTOR Vareo-prudeh has built its reputation as a leader In tho nonresidential construction market by supplYch]g Sl'pe.rjel"sE3ryice and.. . "'roClu'ciS""to"il""ihorlzoo VP.8ullders ~cr~s$;;Noff~;~ffieifda:":Ni '.' " ,.'.._,','...f.........~',.-'1\l!:t.!"".,.~,,.;.~."~:~'.". .~~. -.' ; <Vp ;Buildersha\ie,constructed ..thousanrJs"of Jacllitidsforylrtually .'. every el1dUse,:ranging' from large offlce'to small. storage builtjings. . Each and every facility carries a . reputation.for 'qt.i~Ny'~nd value.. " _ . dVP waU systems are designed to meet the. mostexaCtll1g cUsto'mer . T'" __.... -. _' -, .'.~. .' _..~ . ,_' ',' _ : "." , reqLJirements:~~MadefromJhe '. ~ finest steelliiico'iitrolled plant'; . . ,', environment: YOlj'a~e"assured of ".. . N, " :: . ~ a high,gu_ali~,'~lghl~':~~Jqi,e~t: ;. ., L' . ~ I structl;Jre."}y~. ~.aU"sy~!e.r\.1~ 'also . ". '. ~:;';' ',' '1 . ~ri~~~r~~~J~d:~~~i,~b~fr ~~~~ . ., ;>,:)~,;;bW: '., . aesthetic'reciuirem~nts: ;'-~ri'd, \~.,: :~'.' >.,~/~r "whenryc>n-TIi,etalytaUs are. d,esireCl. '"':::">,::~ S your\/P Builder can'C'o~stiuct your :Y.;::::i:::;i building'with virtually any"..," "", .... alternative material, .easily. . . ".., TOD 0: :>'111 Tlllntlon ,.:',S~,;;>i..!x .0',103: 0,107 0,085 'u,082 Y.' "', " Total Thickness . 'O:()217 '.' <0.0~79 .' ,Y:~~f':.s,i:;SEicti~n :moduius (inChe~3) . '. I .~rjU,;:JX~ Moment 01 inertia {inChes4)________ _~___ _________J ~ " '. .._----~.... F.-~ -c- THERMAL DeSIGN VALUES FOR VP 100NP 002 2" 3" '4" Calculated' R-Value U-Value 7.41 O. ~35 11.80 () .085 15.10 C.066 In-Place.. R- Value U-Value 6.08 0.165 7.74 0,129 8.45 0.118 .."ll,,~ . . ~ \~l~~~ t1 . " .'~??;~ ;i -:,: ~ ;.: ~. ",~:: ~- ~j.:: __ oh ,.;.:;~ /.;!;if \ . , ~'Calculated thermal values r:.3 based on full insulation thickness. "In-Place thermal values are based on ASTM C236 Guarded Hot Box Tes~ or are . ';;alculated accounting for effects of fasteners and insulation compression when the Tests are not available, . . . . ,.,1" . I'---~-'''' ---,--- -, ---....--.---.--'------.-.---.--.--..... . ,.', ----------... , ~~iJ;;.'1~':,1<-,iE!l\.".~~~.z.":E~?r0~~.;:z~.::.;;Z\1~;;:.~:T':.Z:2?ii"ID'"~.z::~~.J;:~';;J:::t:'lJU'i~~r~~$;i?-i;~;;~:;~~' .;.' KOOOJ. i.'~.;!J.. . . Va. .~Cf!.Pi'UdeiD < "'~ r~~' (D~1i~~:t~lJfi"'g' ~ ~~ , i>~,~ D~i3J~9l~tllft. ~ "" 2 C YEAR H . !,.' l.-.-.._--= : ,r.. Unitsd Dominion Cernes!'!'1 . 't\i,,\R:(;;\NTY ~f'IDOr{~:;f.Ai1;::\iT ' .~, KXL P)~NE~ flNtiSH Built On Superior Sarvice 't. 'I;~ ~ ~-". :~; ~ "'01,_ ~i ~ ;~ ~ 1~..' .;: .: ~ i. '':'l .~ " .j '.~'..',',""'.' ~.~~ ~;f, :?~ ;'1 ,'": :'3 ~ll . ~~~ ~. ~1i.l -,'. L~ i.,;~: ;. ::~~ :\~ t:~~ ;-~ ~ ~. ~ ir. L.. v,,~C=,"WD<:I'; JIJllc-lNG:i,,, :l,,'l~!..ln 0; Unli.,c: Oo",inlo(l 'i.,..L;- :I), :;"": 'JfCff':o."'Ih ;N~l-;C1 ?c~ ~"'l1:;:, icc:cry '.Jpphed '0 :n~ l~:~'\O' 'h~.-;OC.: 'J: IO'-of ond/"3' we.; ~on,~;; "~;)'~i1 lfH~cIL.,.j :p ',";;,;~~(.=c:~~' \'1'1';', -'i~"~C:;-l1'Jc:~eN'1 ~o""hC~nCj~l an !lnl:ctlofH <.:' vny "'..\~CO.;>RU~:-.l bJ;lc.~ In !lta CcN~nlcl Lh 3d ;:IOltU. (:')~lln~nlc: ':'Jntldil on-d Alol~a, and ':Y~ .upmlld fa "<)10101 o!"'Olph~"c condition I a\ dolir>!id billow wjii. \ubjoacl to rhQ co"d",on\ and li.nitclion.\ Sift 100:' l:;) 1104 "'~~>j, ItQt croc:'. ck"c~. billl.,r. p<!1l1. hok.. 01 ch,p, e1 ~ !::l o;>lor I"llCro Ihon 5E UIlIII ru C,lC01Uflld I.~ occor(lcnc~ ",it!\ AS-:"M D-21,~J.79 paragraph .\ 3 ";! A 0: chalk ,nt"'C~\1 ~ on AST"" ~5';)-oo no. a raring for a p3"od 01 rwonryl201 Yllorl ohor lhtprn.l'd. ,S'l wflIrunry do,,\ ~.." opply. hOwlJv-,r 10 roof and/or 'IVeIi panel.! It'I~f~ll.,d C'r on, b:.:i!d~t"l; locatcd il~ th~ 'iiCin...t ~ l) ~uh", ,..01:01 IhorollnQ. or c:homio:ol plonl or orry WJd'~ ~ wctcira do"'og~ 10 roof and/or wall pon8b moIl, lroc~obla te on .<i3nllfiobl" lourc~ of c:orrOliv~ dilCh~ ~ Qf c~ which hovo. on 0 . 1l9u1c; b':llil, olfsc:od wcll ~u!ldng. In odd,hon. Ihll wcrranty lholl nol opply :0: 101 roof cnd/or woll ponalllhOl havll e,;<Jn eomcgoo In ll"t;nti . or on iob ll'o! or hov01 b~en improplJrly slorlJd; (bl roef or~ w.:ll ponllls Ihol :'ov~ b'ltln lub"c:Ild \10 m!~uw. n!l~hg~"c:~. or hove beon ,ncv'!d from rho orisind ploc.) of '",:'crlon. or (ocl and/or wol! pano!:. Ihol hov" nol bun erec:,d ,n occord'JnC!i With 011 opplic:o~:e VAQC07RUClEN dro......ng~ ond InltruelionJ ond gooc "r~c:ion ~~ (c) coll,,:crol building mot~rjell. '~cce;sori\1s. oqulpm:tili ond O:;lrw ,t"mS not soid b,! VARCC :'WDEN ond <:fly dClT~- 10 :cd ond/or woll p'~n"is resu!ling Ihorolrom; (d) domoge :::: or d"leC:l,n roof ond/or woll ponch ,=eu..,~ 1:rr ,merop., 'nll'JIlOIIOn ~cl dom09":0 or def"cll in roof ond/or woll ponoll couse:l by i"m OCCCSlorllH or IOltonefl not lupplilld by VAR:O. PRUOEN or delltr,or::Jlion ," Ik;J I':'of end/or wall panels reloled Iher~lo; If 1 ,h3 condition known 01 'microcrccxing' of rool and/or ~rcii ',: POnl!:i1 wh.eh is 0 common OCCurranC$ in III'! forming . prO~3H of color ccol,d roof and/or wall pcnels ond is nol 10 b~ ace",~ci 0 defecl warranted ~I:)r.,u"dcr: end . !9; oom09U. fad,,,!) or dolflall CO'J1'C by Acts 01 God. bl!ir.g ObpC'1. "'/ornol forcol. e.plolll:'r.. fire. riOll. civil :o",,,,ollonl. ~ar",fui fumes. !oroign lubltonC"l in Ihll (;.~mO'ohQ; 3, or corrOllon cou\"d Dt 'J"'i'OI\110 10 mOllr.,.. =-rmosphg(f), ~clt !prcy. chJmICC!S. 01n, cr olomic ladioricfj. -~.\ warranty i1 l!.\l~"dcd solely 10 In? Ow""r ncmeCl heroin one' is ocn.lrO"lbrob!'? on:! "on<lulg,,~blo. Tn.. condition il a merllnel la'm c' ri'l,1 wonoMy and conhe"",,,lion cf the lerm by rh" OW"Cl( Of ils Og3"' or 'epre~~nlo;ov'? lholl ;"I'lfW'l VAgCO.P~UDEN from ih obligOlior'1 ,.,ere;.;nde. i:-1E WARi1i~NileS C~SC;Wl(D A:--lO ~IM!Ti:D A1.l0Vi: AND THE ,~MDIES SE, ::O:<rH 3EtOW FO!! Rem AN~/Oll WAll P.b.NELS :,HAll BE j~. lieU Oi' .1,Ll OTH~~ WARRANTIES OR ~~MEDI::5 "i'''ET:-iE~ e;?iZESS~O O~ 1/vIr-UFO. INCLUi.)!~-i(; aUl NOT LlMIT~,) r::;; ANY IMPI.lr.D WA:ZRANTIES OF Mci1Cj".\NTA8111T'r' AND Fln~cSS FOR;1. ?/\iHiCULAR i'URPOSE Upon ....."ltan nolificalion r9ClllV.,d by VARCO.PIlUDEN within rho ~',.., aOO'fl>-IIOI:td worro"ty poriod ond mcdo by Iho Ownar within thirty (30) do,!s from detection of any failurll of tho mar.riols 10 conform 10 :h" cb'ovlI wcrranty, u~on pr"senlotion by the O...nor 01 this fully ,""culad worranty ogr-oemenl. a"d upon inspoclionby VAlleO- PRUL)EN to verify said nonconformity, VAReO.PRUDEN sholl. ot its lolll oplion. "pair, rllplllC' or r1p1:inl 1001 and/ol w09 pontla proyfd 10 ~ ceflldivo without charge to tho Owner. BoIor. any color change \J\.d3~C(!:::td )0 f~ce l~ ~"'o~vr.,d, (Jr.'! :hc;::.. cr dIn on pC;:';3h '.ru:l b) -1',",OYf1G J'.' ....(':~;..1;~1 :;~:'i':i"i;':7 "'Id", .; _,.;.ol,:) ~ch..;!..:.."1 ]1 :'~e..,"'mt.l"',,~,; ':..,. ';'01i""1 z.t..:~~j:~J(. .:;.,d .......i;,;I~H1 crl ""'I:"; 'J .)ci! ,join 7h,"" li-.'~l")CC: '; :""'!Oi")f:l)fl ~."'iull ':::'J c' '.IA.~C:; ?f\l..'i':':N'1. ~(;j~ dl~cr"i1cn .:::;,.".::1.;.:1'..:..... ,; n.).~coniCf,ntth.U. in the 'l':annar and f.,;r :11f) Dcrlod 000';':) $hali ~C.,,:,j.'iul" fuiiillmllnl oi ail :::bllgol1onl "f '1;;~CO.r'>(UOE,.. 10 !flu 0w~", wiHnwr bOleC ~pon co,,"oc!. tor! (including ""glioonc'll. IIrlC! ilob.lit) or olhirw'\1. ,\ny rtlp::Ji'od. '"p!l'nl~d or r<>plon-:l ::.0(.;1',,1. lUppjl~d on Icli,'ccho'1 0/ !n.;! 00119,.lic n, und.., .ho; ''''orrC"~)I ~ilol; b6 IUb'OCl iO .h'l warmnry only lor Ih, r3molnd.Jr of Ih.. pollod oppl;co~i~ !o Ih" proauCl arig,nolly purcholed. Failura of th3 Own!)r 10 9'''0 ,,,...ely "Glice 10 'IA~C0.PRUDEN of foillJ'" Ie conform rel:~"el VAR(.:).PRIJDEN of .:;ny and 011 obliQo:ions und31 rl11l worranly TliE REMEDIES ~EI ~<'H!H HEREiN ARE EXC1ll5IVE. VmHO'jT ~EGAllD TO WHETH~~ . r..:" OE~cCT WAS DISCOVERABLE OR lAT(;NT ,q THE TIME \..:' UE~IV~RY OF THE MATERIALS TO THE OWNER. Th... ossonlial purpOlO of this .XclUlIV~ remedy ~holl be 10 providll the Ownar with rape" or ~.ploc~' '~nl of ponllli thol pro".. to bo d.foClivo within the p.1".;>d C'ne u"j,,; !.." ccnO:licns prevloully leI iorth. This oxdusive rllmedy )no!l nol heve f. I." oil" euenhol p~'rpose (o~ the: '"rm ;s used in the Unilc~m Cornm::rClol Cod,,} prav,dod V,:IilCO-PRUi)EN remain, w,i:ing 10 r!:l!:Xl" or repiac;) dafeclivo paneh wilhin 0 comm'!rciolly rlJoH.n~l,le time aftcr il obloln~ octuel ~nowllldg., ollh'! .",~tenCII 01 0 particular d""lJO:! iN :\10 eVENT S'lAll VARCO-P~UDEN Bt lIA8LE FO:< ANY SPECIAL. CONS"'~U!:NTIAL. !NCIDENTAL OR INDIRECT DAMAGES WITH RESPECT TO HilS SALE OR ANYTHING DONE IN CONNECTION HERt:WITH pNCLUDING. Wm~OUT 1I.'v\IT...T10N. ExECTION SERV'CES F~O'/Ir>~D BY BUIlOER 0;;: BY VARCO. P!P;D:I'l!, W~'EiHF.~ 3/..SEO UPON C6~HP.ACT. TORi IINetJDING ;-iCGlIGENCEl. STRiCT lIABILl1'l' OR OTHERWISE l::<C~I'T TO THE EXTENT MODIFIED HEREIN. THE WARRANTY COVERA0,' APPllCA8~E TO THIS BuilDING SI'lALl BE AS STATED ii': VA::C:).PRUDEN'S '<;jANDARD WARRANTY: AND ALL lIMITA"lf)N::i. ;-XeLuSh':''' is AND OISCL.l,IMEr.S iNClU~ED IN $A):; .S'(.:Ni)AkO ','i:'.::RA. .'f'(' SHAll APPLY l,'.'ITr< FULL FORCE HE~;:~C' EX,:r.PT FOR HiE Ai'~IRMATIVE O.lIGAiIONS UND':~" ..,KEN ~y \O~e":'.p~U.:JEN HERE!N. ANY INCON~;~'n:Nry BETWEEN ,Hi: TE~MS Or THIS WAR~."'NTY AN~ THE TB.Vi.; OF SAID 'STANDARD WARRANTY' Shl.lL 8E ~ESOlVED iN i'A'IOR OF THE TE~MS OF SAID 'STANDA~C' WAR~.',NT'f.' OQt3I~UQd Vorco-:"rud'JT; Au"iF.Orizclion Q""'1:.:r W Joo ii Joo locotion S' et:1 GiY S'ole evifa,.,r'~ Nom~ Vcrco-Prudon iuildin2Sr a ~ivision of United Dominion Industris:l, Ine. IC29 ,O/92.500.AP j~;~ .... I , II J I , i r; I 1f~