bza-minutes-jun-27-23REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
This meeting was conducted in a hybrid format with in‐person and remote options for attending,
participating, and commenting. The City used Webex to conduct this meeting and members of the public
were able to monitor the meeting and provide comment by calling in.
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7 pm and the land acknowledgement was read by Chair Carlson.
Roll Call
Members present: Chris Carlson, Elizabeth Greiter, Nancy Nelson, Richard Orenstein, Chuck
Segelbaum – Planning Commissioner
Members absent:
Staff present: Jason Zimmerman – Planning Manager, Myles Campbell – Planner, Lia Siro –
Planning Intern
Approval of Agenda
MOTION made by Orenstein, seconded by Segelbam to approve the agenda of June 27, 2023, as
submitted. Motion carried.
Approval of Minutes
MOTION made by Orenstein, seconded by Carlson to approve the May 23, 2023 meeting minutes.
Motion carried.
1.Address: 24 Maddaus Lane
Applicant: Ashley and Sean Kelly
Requests:
A variance of 0.3 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 34.7 feet for an attached garage
from the front property line (east).
A variance of 5.3 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 29.7 feet for an attached garage
from the front property line (north).
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager, reviewed the location and noted the lot is a corner lot, the
year it was constructed and the setback being only 27 feet from the east (front yard) property line.
This means the property is conforming under the City’s pre‐1982 structure regulations.
The owner would like to locate a new attached garage in the front along Glenwood and the request
covers 0.3‐foot intrusion into the front along Maddaus.
June 27, 2022 – 7 pm
City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting
June 27, 2023 – 7 pm
2
Practical Difficulties
1. Given the unusual construction of the existing detached garage, and its size which would be
viewed as insufficient by today’s standards, staff believes it is reasonable to construct a new
attached garage. The flat yard to the north of the home appears to be the best location for the
structure and while two variances from the front yard setbacks are being requested, staff
believes these can be reduced or eliminated with minimal impact to functionality. Therefore,
staff believes the proposed use is reasonable.
2. The property in question has topography that makes rebuilding or expanding the existing
detached garage in its current location challenging. Attaching a new garage to the south side of
the home, with existing varying rooflines, is not advisable. Staff believes these problems are
not caused by the landowner and are unique to the property.
3. A number of properties along Glenwood Avenue have garages that are located between the
home and the right‐of‐way. Many of these include driveways and curb cuts onto Glenwood,
which this proposal would not. Given the existing conditions, staff does not believe the
construction of a new garage north of the home would alter the essential character –
especially if the extent of the variances can be reduced or negated.
Other Considerations
Staff assesses whether the request represents the smallest feasible variance or if there are other
options available:
Another option for an attached garage would be to locate it on the south side of the home.
Likely no variances would be needed under this scenario, but the varying rooflines on this
portion of the home would make construction challenging.
Staff believes the currently proposed garage could be shifted 0.3 feet to the west, removing the
need for one of the variances, without any impact to the layout or functionality of the lot. In
order to reduce the impact of the proposed garage to the front yard (along Glenwood), the
footprint could be reduced by removing the service door facing Maddaus Lane and/or shrinking
the interior space of the garage. Reducing the width of the garage from 32 feet to 28 feet would
result in a smaller variance of only 1.3 feet.
Recommendations
Staff recommends denial of the variance of 0.3 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 34.7 feet
for an attached garage from the front (east) property line.
Staff recommends approval of a modified variance of 1.3 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance
of 33.7 feet for an attached garage from the front (north) property line, with the following condition:
1. The existing detached garage, driveway, and curb cut shall be removed and the curb line
along Maddaus Lane restored.
Members and staff reviewed potential alternatives and staff’s recommendation.
Chair Carlson invited the applicant to speak.
City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting
June 27, 2023 – 7 pm
3
Ashley and Sean Kelly, applicant, stated staff gave a thorough presentation and noted the attached
garage will accommodate their family better. Applicants stated they want to stay in their home long
term and while when they bought the house, they were told the garage was structurally sound that
could change over time. They would like to replace the garage before it’s a safety issue. They added
they can meet staff’s request to modify their request.
Chair Carlson opened the public hearing 7:21pm.
There were no in person comments.
There were no online/remote comments.
Chair Carlson closed the hearing at 7:23pm.
Nelson noted that an attached garage is more appealing than detached, additionally Glenwood adds
unique elements, and this request is reasonable. Commissioner Segelbaum added that an attached
garage is a great addition and removing the detached seems reasonable as the floor is wood with a crawl
space underneath. 28 vs 30‐ or 32‐foot garage doesn’t have a huge impact given its location on Glenwood
specifically. Segelbaum added that denying the 0.3 seems reasonable as the applicant stated they can
accommodate and approving the second. The group echoed this comment.
MOTION made by Segelbaum, seconded by Orenstein to deny the variance of 0.3 feet off the
required 35 feet to a distance of 34.7 feet for an attached garage from the front (east) property line.
Motion carried
MOTION made by Nelson, seconded by Segelbaum to approve the variance of 5.3 feet off the
required 35 feet to a distance of 29.7 feet for an attached garage from the front property line
(north).
Motion carried
2. Address: 5630 Golden Valley Road
Applicant: Sarah Bachmann‐Lane and Peter Lane
Request: A variance of 3.58’ off the required 35’ to a total distance of 32.33’ from the front property
line for a detached garage.
Lia Siro, Planning Intern, Listed the variance request and noted the home’s location in the City as
well as it being a corner lot.
The applicant wishes to expand the existing detached garage, noting the driveway would expand but
not exceed the 50% impervious requirement.
Practical Difficulties
The proposed garage expansion is a single story and reasonably scaled to 24' width to what
they are trying to achieve, and the overall encroachment into the setback is minor. Therefore,
staff believes the variance requests propose to use the property in a reasonable manner.
City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting
June 27, 2023 – 7 pm
4
The lot's greenspace creates a unique circumstance, a mature tree occupies the rear of the
existing garage, restricting the homeowner's ability to push the garage expansion further back
within the front setback. Staff believes the site does exhibit unique circumstances.
The garage expansion will be visible from street view and fits within character of surrounding
two‐car garages. The garage will directly face the street which is in character with other houses
despite the properties angled setback. Staff believes the proposed use would not alter the
essential character of the neighborhood and city.
Other Considerations
Staff assesses whether the request represents the smallest feasible variance or if there are other
options available:
Existing garage currently sits within the 35' setback. The garage is in disrepair and needs to be
replaced.
Applicant could maintain the concrete pad & apron and widen the garage south towards the
house.
Rebuild the foundation angling the new garage, avoiding the need for a variance, but
would require more significant reconstruction and be out of character with surrounding
properties.
Recommendations
Based on the factors above, staff recommends approval of the variance request for 31.65 feet off the
required 35 feet to a distance of 3.35 feet for a front yard setback.
Members and staff reviewed the exact triangle section that is requiring the variance.
Chair Carlson invited the applicant to speak.
Sarah Bachmann‐Lane and Peter Lane, applicants, noted that the driveway aligns with the south
portion of the driveway and then the driveway was poured wider to the north. The would prefer to
expand the garage to the north to align with the driveway than need to expand the concrete AND the
garage to the south. The applicants also noted the apron slopes up so the garage is higher in
elevation than the driveway. The goal isn’t to expand the driveway. Additionally, the applicant is
hoping to add a sunroom and expanding the garage to the south will encroach on that.
Chair Carlson opened the public hearing 7:36pm.
There were no in person comments.
There were no online/remote comments.
Chair Carlson closed the hearing at 7:38pm.
Orenstein noted the BZA has a history of approving variances like this to increase the value of the housing
stock. Increasing a one car garage to a two, is reasonable. Segelbaum added that it’s in the City and
homeowner’s interest to expand garages like this. Often the group is protective of front yard set backs
but this is a corner lot with two, and this variance is minimal. Alternatives would have a greater impact on
the lot and neighborhood.
City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting
June 27, 2023 – 7 pm
5
MOTION made by Carlson, seconded by Orenstein to approve the variance request for 31.65 feet off
the required 35 feet to a distance of 3.35 feet for a front yard setback.
Motion carried
3. Address: 2320 Aquilla Ave N
Applicant: Nathan Elliot
Request: A variance of 11 inches off the required 15 feet to a total distance of 14 feet 1 inch from the
side property line for a home addition.
Myles Campbell, Planner, discussed the request, noted its location in the City, the home is located in
the middle of the block and the applicant would like to expand an attached garage.
Staff noted there are mature trees to the north and south of the garage as well as in front of the
home. Due to that, the applicant would like to create a tandem stall to allow for indoor parking of 3
vehicles year‐round. Staff detailed dimensions.
Practical Difficulties
The proposed reduction is very minor and the design overall seeks to minimize the setback
encroachment as much as possible. However, unlike a two‐car garage which is required by
zoning code for all R‐1 properties, the ability to build a three‐car garage is not a reasonable
expectation for all lots in the city. Staff does not find this request reasonable.
The home’s existing location puts it already within the front and side setbacks. In addition, trees
both to the north and south of the garage today would need to be removed in case of a
different design, and the tree to the north would likewise be impacted by a detached garage to
the rear of the home. Staff believe the site does exhibit unique circumstances.
The home’s existing location puts it already within the front and side setbacks. In addition, trees
both to the north and south of the garage today would need to be removed in case of a
different design, and the tree to the north would likewise be impacted by a detached garage to
the rear of the home. Staff believe the site does exhibit unique circumstances.
The garage addition would be to the rear of the existing structure and not very visible from the
street, although it would be slightly closer to the neighboring structure. The amount of
encroachment into the setback would be minimal however, and staff believes that the
requested variances will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood and city.
Other Considerations
Staff assesses whether the request represents the smallest feasible variance or if there are other
options available:
Very few alternatives exist to expand the garage to 3 stalls, although it can be maintained and
replaced in its current location due to being legally nonconforming.
Recommendations
City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting
June 27, 2023 – 7 pm
6
Based on the factors above, staff recommends denial of the variance request for 11” off the
required 15’ to a total distance of 14’1” from the side property line for a home addition.
Members and staff discussed findings, staff recommendation, and the Board being allowed to make
their own findings in terms of the request being reasonable within the parameters listed. The
conversation continued on attached versus detached, fire code, and the reasonableness of a 3‐car
garage.
Chair Carlson invited the applicant to speak.
Nathan Elliot and Chad Forseland, Applicants, stated that this request is the most reasonable way to
utilize the given space. This solution repairs the issue of a current falling apart shed and broken
concrete, as well as offers space for the applicant’s third vehicle. Additionally, the lot has a lot of tree
coverage and a third space will allow the cars to all be protected from damage. The tandem design
utilizes some current space versus an additional space that would increase the width of the garage.
Chair Carlson opened the public hearing 8:05pm.
There were no in person comments.
There were no online/remote comments.
Chair Carlson closed the hearing at 8:07pm.
The Board discussion revolved around articulation requirements that were not included in the original
request. The group discussed the elements surrounding the articulation and a side yard setback
encroachment. The conversation continued with the third stall, the dimensions, the findings on the three
factors, and reasonable use. Commissioner Segelbaum noted reasonable is subjective and while a three‐
car garage isn’t a priority like a two‐car garage, adding a third tandem stall to this home, in this location,
is a reasonable use. He noted the minimal impacts to the neighbors, the lot shape and size, and added
he’s in favor of the variance. Greiter echoed these comments. Orenstein said it seems the group is in
favor of the variance but the articulation requirement must be included.
MOTION made by Commissioner Segelbaum, seconded by Orenstein to approve the variance
request for 11” off the required 15’ to a total distance of 14’1” from the side (north) property line for
a home addition, as stated in the plans.
Adopt staff’s findings related to 2 and 3, and add finding 1 is reasonable given the amount of the
variance and use of the property.
Motion carried
4.Adjournment
MOTION made by Orenstein, seconded by Chair Carlson and the motion carried unanimously to
adjourn the meeting at 8:21 pm.
Motion carried. ________________________________
Chris Carlson, Chair
_________________________________
Amie Kolesar, Planning Assistant