02-26-08 BZA Agenda
Board of Zoning Appeals
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
7pm
7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Conference Room
I. Approval of Minutes - January 22, 2008
II. The Petitions are:
2404 McNair Drive (08-02-02)
Cleon & Cheryl Wahlin, Applicant
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 1 0(A)(1) Front Yard Setback
Requirements
. 7ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 28 ft. at its closest point
to the front yard (west) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a garage with living space above.
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 10(A)(3)(b) Side Yard Setback
Requirements
. 1.5 ft. off the required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 11 ft. at its closest
point to the side yard (south) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a garage with living space above.
III. Other Business
IV. Adjournment
nate formats upon a 72.hour request. Please call
763- 68) to make a request. Examples of alternate formats
may include large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette, etc.
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
January 22,2008
A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday,
January 22,2008 at City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chair
Boudreau-Landis called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Members, Boudreau-Landis, Hughes, Nederveld,
Planning Commission Representative McCarty. Also present were Dire
and Development Mark Grimes, City Planner Joe Hogeboom and in
Lisa Wittman.
MOVED by Nederveld, seconded by Boudreau-Landis
approve the December 18, 2007 minutes as submi
I. Approval of Minutes - December 18, 2007
II. The Petitions are:
9400 Golden Valley Road (08-01
Steve Johnson TDB Builders
Request:
ubd. 4(A)(3) Side Yard Setback
ired 20 ft. to a distance of 14.28 ft. at its closest
d (east) property line.
construction of a parking structure.
pphcant is proposing to build a 3-stall parking structure along
ted that this property is zoned Business and Professional
ctures are allowed in this zoning district. However, the side
me is 20 feet and the proposed garage would be located 14.28 feet
y line.
at the owner of this property is in the process of building an addition onto
their exis ilding and as a part of that process they had to meet the Bassett Creek
Water Management Commission's water quality requirements and build a pond. The
pond's location is one of the reasons they feel they can't meet the setback requirements
for the proposed new parking structure.
Steve Johnson, TDB Builders, representing the owner of the property, reiterated that
because of the location and requirements of the pond they had to move the proposed
parking structure further to the east. He stated that the owners have an ambulance, two
company vehicles and general maintenance items that they would like to store in this
proposed parking structure. He added that the size of the ambulance is also dictating the
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
January 22, 2008
Page 2
size of the parking structure and thatthe owner would like to have this parking structure for
safety of the vehicles and to clean up the look of the site and the parking lot.
Johnson referred to renderings of the proposed new parking structure and explained that
the materials will match the existing building and the new addition which will be a LEED
certified building.
McCarty asked how far along construction is on the garage. Johnson stated that the pad is
ready but that they aren't planning on building the garage until spring. He that there
is a slight swale along the east property line and the new trash enclosur ew
garage will help direct the water to the pond.
McCarty said he do
o make sure that this
s exp ained that the proposed garage
d and that it won't affect her
Hughes asked if the new parking structure will reduce the numb
Johnson said no.
McCarty asked what the term "proof-of-parking" means. Grime
parking" means they have the ability and the room to p
required in the future.
Boudreau-Landis opened the public hearing.
Teresa Raymond, 9326 Golden Valley
proposal won't affect her property in an
would be five feet closer to the pro
property at all.
Seeing and hearing no one
hearing.
comment, Boudreau-Landis closed the public
Nederveld said
he's not sure t
the propo
were n
ments are a unique aspect of this property. He said
r ge is a hardship but he doesn't have any objections to
u-Landis agreed and added that the ponding requirements
erty owner so he would also support the variance request.
seconded by Hughes and motion carried unanimously to approve the
fo 5.72 ft. off the required 20 ft. to a distance of 14.28 ft. at its closest
yard (east) property line to allow for the construction of a parking
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
January 22, 2008
Page 3
2440 Valders Avenue North (08-01-02)
Thomas BeQuette. Applicant
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(1) Accessory Structure
Location Requirements
Hughes asked why there n
that a fire truck couldn't fi
zoning code requires 10 f
. 4 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 6 ft. at its closest point
to the principal structure.
Purpose: To bring the existing garage into conformance w' h
structure location requirements.
Hogeboom stated that the applicant is requesting a variance i
garage into conformance with accessory structure location req
that the garage is located 10 feet away from the home equi
away from a deck. He stated that the hardship noted b
he built the garage in is the only suitable location
Nederveld asked when the garage was construct
constructed and upon inspection it was dis
the existing deck. Grimes said it is his g
permit for the garage the existing deck
the reason staff would like to see c
permits.
id it was just recently
age was built too close to
plicant applied for a building
the survey. He added that this is
applicants apply for building
et between the garage and the deck and noted
k and garage anyway. Grimes stated that the
ipal and accessory structures.
Nederveld asked the
Bequette, appli t,
permit for the d
be built 1
1 0 feet
received a building permit for the garage. Thomas
mes asked the applicant if he received a building
e said no. He stated that he knew the garage was supposed to
e house but he did not realize that it was supposed to be built
as well.
ut the distinction between the deck being attached or unattached to
reau-Landis said his guess is that the deck would have to be bolted to the
idered attached. Grimes explained that even if the deck were considered
an acces tructure and not part of the principal structure there would still need to be
10 feet of separation between it and the garage.
Segelbaum asked if retaining walls are considered accessory structures. Grimes said no.
Segelbaum asked if the property has the same slope on the other side (the north) of the
house. Bequette stated that there are large trees on the north side of the property and the
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
January 22, 2008
Page 4
driveway was already located on the southwest side of the lot so it was the most logical
place to put the garage.
McCarty asked about the distance from the garage to the south property line. Bequette
said he thinks the distance from the garage to the south property line is approximately 5 or
6 feet.
Grimes asked the applicant if there was a garage previously on the site. B
there was no garage on the property.
Grimes said he would tal
be shown on a survey at t
arage is minimal in size and
d have granted a variance
e it was built so he is inclined to
ould have come before the Board
d him to push it back a little bit further
Segelbaum asked the applicant if he had to bring in fill in order to
Bequette said yes and he also had to build a retaining wall behi
Boudreau-Landis opened the public hearing. Seeing and hear
comment Boudreau-Landis closed the public hearing.
Boudreau-Landis said he doesn't have any issues
issue with the deck being built without a building
Nederveld stated that the applicant didn't h
it was built in a reasonable place and th
for it if the applicant would have come t
approve it. McCarty said he agrees
prior to building the garage they
and it might not have needed a
. s Department about requiring all structures to
UlI I permit is requested.
MOVED by McCarty,
approve a vari e fo
the principal str
structure I
Boudreau-Landis and motion carried unanimously to
quired 10ft. to a distance of 6 ft.. at its closest point to
existing garage into conformance with accessory
IV. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 pm.
- 3400
I
t - 3300
1- 3200
,- 3100
i - 3000
!
! - 2900
i
~
.....
CJ
!oJ
~
'"
Z
m
0.::
2
M
N
o
>-
...
-
o
CIBAl'BIC lICAJJi
"'-""_ -L........... .
,--I
....- ..
3
- 2800
~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ !
I I I I I I I I I I I I
4
5 , 2404 McNair Drive I
6
- 1900
7
- 1800
- 1700
'"
- 1600 -
....J 8
~
- 1500 <t
~
i:
1300 9
.....
CJ
>-
...
-
0
11
:.",:::;:.,. -600
,...,j,....,
i-5OO
"
,!-.';:..~i',.:...,'i',,'/c~C.'.'i.,:~"';",..,-,. .
l -400
I.
300
~;
c; -200
Ii -100 3
,:,",._0
5
I' I I I I I I I I I I I
~ I ! I ~ ~ I ! ! ~ ~ I I
I I I I I I I
I ! ~ I ~ ~ ~
Hey
Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
February 14, 2008
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
Joe Hogeboom, City Planner
2404 McNair Drive
Cleon and Cheryl Wahlin, Applicants
To:
From:
Subject:
Cleon and Cheryl Wahlin are the owners of the property located at 2404 McNair Drive. Mr. and
Ms. Wahlin are requesting a variance to City Code to construct a proposed two-stall garage
with a second floor family room. The proposed addition would encroach into the front and side
yard setbacks of the property.
As described by Ms. Wahlin, the lack of a two-stall garage creates a hardship. Currently, there
is insufficient indoor vehicle parking on the premises. Auto theft has occurred as a
consequence of cars being parked outside. Also, the rolling topography of the parcel limits
alternative placements for the addition.
The proposed project requires variances from the following sections of City Code:
. Section 11.21, Subd. 10(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements.
The City's Zoning Code states that front yard setbacks in the Single Family (R1) Zoning District
must be at least 35 feet from the front property line along the street right of way line. Mr. and
Ms. Wahlin are requesting 7 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 28 feet at its closest
point to the front (west) yard property line to allow for the construction of an attached garage
with living space above.
. Section 11.21, Subd. 10(A)(3)(b) Side Yard Setback Requirements.
The City's Zoning Code states that side yard setbacks in the Single Family (R1) Zoning District
must be at least 12.5 feet from the side property line when lot width falls between 65 and 100
feet. Mr. and Ms. Wahlin are requesting 1.5 feet off the required 12.5 feet to a distance of 11
feet at its closest point to the side (south) yard property line to allow for the construction of an
attached garage with living space above.
No prior variances from City Code were found for this property.
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
Surveyed for:
Cleon and Cheryl Wahlin
2404 McNair Drive North
Golden Valley, MN 55422
~ ~~ q./ O~>c;r7-;:f--/') ____
P.::~4/',qn #~.....:, ~~ 3' rq/ 4"'H/~
B/.:::>.c.~ C? LoT /.y """,....,d -1/W ~
.. ..../ . . . - .. ----.-
-/'-"",,~r """,-q/ ,,-e4'r .-;'? L.-r /3,;
/,;~ c4-~~v ~AZ:;:_f!!"t_~-i~~""'r_
Jt-2~)1?~:-~~;; 51~1.f
Scale: 1" = 20' "
"
"'" (I
1\ '-.0
'"
.L- "
......" "-
"'O:>~ "-
~ "-
.~
'"
Iron monument found
5/8 inch rebar set and
capped RLS 17496
---:>-
~
-z..-
~
~
~
.........L-
~
Bradlel Canaday Surveyin
6976 26 Street Court North
Oakdale, MN 55128
651-779-6435
R......,.....sJill../. 4~~./ ...<",-?1-~.T
~;"e:::."'.f..,;'-h"J' ""~o/""$
Job No. 07-09
I hereby certify that this survey and map was
prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly Registered
Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of
Minnesota. ."- '. . _
".-'""..... -.;\~ of"......./'
7:'"-1'"-':.'~_/;~""~~;:;~{.'~"'/-'--"'--"'" 2-;:;"'-""'-
~?:.;!1:;:::;:::::,~;2::;~-.,~~~~:c~~;:'-'-
Bradle.y-:.Cafiaday ,
Reg. No. 17496
Date
/~) -
..r'-_./'~:::~",.!,"'~
,/"
City of Golden Valley
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)
Zoning Code Variance Application
1. Street address of property involved in this application:
cJtfo '-/ ~ L,Jet I' r- hr
2. Applicant: ~etJv\ 't-... ae-n.tl W~tfV
Name
j2t./o '-f fvtcJ'..['~ir W
Address
6Jo i ~ Vp..ll~ 1-1 N S9f.,J-.J-
City/State/Zip
q~.) - SC) tf-77c; if
Business Phone
7~ 3~~~ - o;;;.---/j
Home Phone
&1e?--799 -~'Id-O
Cell Phone
. ~0./ II ~ n Y\ tfc..f ~ CovvLCA S-b, nee
Email Address
3. Detailed description of building(s), addition(s), and alteration(s) involved in this petition. The site
plans and drawings submitted with this petition will be the basis of any variance that may be
approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit is issued.
5wa l')lLr 'fftlA~{L.. lv iJ:-h ~t! ~ ~1 1rJ7:Jyy.....
5.
A brief statement of the hardship which provides legal grounds for the granting of this variance
(see Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach letter, photographs,
or other evidence, if appropriate.
(l1AA~ LJ.>e fvu,p a, ~--' /,('..&L ~g. OMd -b.,uv (~ IVR_ uJa:d--
t{ dltJJ.l~ ~b ~ t:fU0 CtLUJO~ ~ F (~
~~,. -(N,u..hue_~. YYUd~~bYY1 ~..r~ l.tJ*~
~ ,-roI)()c;rdj7~ llhl.<.-&.5 cdfe~.>. IJ -~"
To the best 0 my knowledge tlle statements found in this application are true and correct. I also
understand that unless construction of the action applicable to this variance request, if granted,
is not taken within one year, the variance expires.
4.
~,L tJ~
Slgnat re of Applicant
, .
6. If the applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application, please name the
owner of this property:
Print Name of owner
Signature of owner
Variance Application Submittal:
The following information must be submitted by the application deadline to make a complete
application. If an application is incomplete, it will not be accepted:
~
~
'"
Completed application form, including signatures of surrounding property owners.
A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. See the handout on survey
requirements.
A brief statement of the hardship which provide grounds for the granting of this variance (see
Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach letter, photographs, or
other evidence, if appropriate.
You may submit detailed description of building(s), addition(s), and alteration(s) involved in this
project. The site plans and drawings submitted with this application will be the basis of any
variance that may be approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit is
issued.
~ Variance application fee, as follows: $125 - single family residential; $225 - other
Signatures of Surrounding Property Owners
Note to the variance applicant:
As part of the variance application process, you will need to attempt to obtain the signatures of all
surrounding property owners. This includes all properties abutting the applicant's property and directly
across the street. If on a corner, this means across both streets.
To obtain these signatures, you will need to personally visit each of these property owners, tell them
about your project (we encourage you to bring along a copy of your building plans) and have them
sign the area, below. The signature is meant only to verify that you have told them about your
project and gives them opportunity to comment.
If you have attempted to contact a property owner on two separate occasions and not found them at
home, you may simply write something to the effect "made two attempts, owner not home" and then
write their address. City staff will also send a written notice informing these property owners of the
time and place of the aZA meeting.
Note to surrounding property owners:
This is an application by your neighbor for a variance from the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of
any possible effect the granting of this variance could have on your property. You will also be
receiving a written notice informing you of the time and place of the variance meeting.
By signing this form, you are only verifying that you have been told about the project, not that
you necessarily agree or object to the project. If you wish, you may comment on the project.
Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other
statements regarding the project.
Print Name ~
Comment
III ~ hu ec.2
Signature (\Nlfh~ed. ~ rl1(lt!-
Address ~tfoo l;~ rJ
Print Name
330 ~i .A 1.. .... (1ri. $;t": -' -fo -r r e.-J I
~. "".u"....,.L> . 6-l-P~ by 1/;;'3
f~_ 1'~B'Or Address ~/:jvcd
Comment
Signature
Print Name -21 W\ ldh.vha,..-&
Comment
Signature ~..(f,J ~ phone-.
Address
)tf1J1 flt,..-k.j;p~~)
Print Name 't-te te.i'\ L-a.-v' Ol (( e..-
Comment
Signature t'\f~'~"e..cl- ~
Print Name ~~ ~l
Comment
Address
;<4 1,3 Pa.rJGvj'~
r(U1lt~ ~ #:P~ PC1 i'ZlM-.
Signature "~.~ ~
Address ~ ifo r J..-kl'ttur /J.../
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Address
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Address
...' is
.~
1!,
"
~
..
.~~..
,.:
,...
WI
.
'"
I
I
I. I
It
tit
~
~
J1
,. ,,~
,\~.\. ~
,"
., 'Y' .~.
~I : \
..
. ,'~ .
", l'
. if'
I'
)
or,_
1+
,
-' ;/
~:
;
; ~-
I
'II'
.Ii (
:
, .,~ ~
it~
u
......,'.......
Il.
\.
I I
;
,
,,'
1
~
~~
I,t ,
. .,
tt~J.
I
."..
~
j'
\.
. \
,,~,
\,
\
,
" ,
.
~.',
" ·
\
, I
I
I
I
\ .
,
~'
I
J
~
f,~ I j
." '. I
'\
4'1
~
I
'ii
t
~'
)
"
VI
I
f'